NewzIntel.com

Category: Americas

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Stein Meets with Western North Carolinians in Yancey County Impacted by Hurricane Helene

    Source: US State of North Carolina

    Headline: Governor Stein Meets with Western North Carolinians in Yancey County Impacted by Hurricane Helene

    Governor Stein Meets with Western North Carolinians in Yancey County Impacted by Hurricane Helene
    lsaito

    Raleigh, NC

    Today, Governor Josh Stein joined Yancey County Sheriff Shane Hilliard to meet with local officials and North Carolinians impacted by Hurricane Helene damage in Burnsville. He also joined local firefighters to thank them for their heroic work as first responders. 

    “Yancey County residents are supporting each other in inspiring ways,” said Governor Josh Stein. “Just as they are working together to recover, so must we help them rebuild schools, small businesses, and critical infrastructure. I am grateful for the General Assembly’s ongoing work to get dollars to impacted areas, while I continue to push them and Congress to allocate meaningful resources to ensure western North Carolina is not forgotten.”

    In Burnsville, Governor Stein viewed damage from the South Toe River flood and stopped by the South Toe Fire Department to honor their emergency response efforts.

    Since taking office, Governor Stein has prioritized getting aid out west with urgency, focus, transparency, and accountability:  

    • Last month, Governor Stein requested an additional $19 billion in federal funds to restore infrastructure, support home repair and renovation, and reduce impacts from future natural disasters. Read more about Governor Stein’s continued advocacy here.
    • Governor Stein continues to work with the legislature to secure state funding to address immediate needs in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, following his request for $1.07 billion. 
    • This week, the Governor’s Recovery Office for Western North Carolina launched a recovery dashboard with updates, resources, and information detailing progress of Helene recovery efforts.  
    Mar 6, 2025

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Former Lawyer Sentenced for Paying for Sex Acts with Cambodian Children

    Source: US State of California

    A Florida man was sentenced today to nine years in prison for paying a child in a foreign country to engage in a commercial sex act with him.

    According to court documents, Rugh James Cline, 44, a former Florida-licensed attorney of Tampa, travelled to Cambodia and paid four Cambodian children to engage in sex acts with him on multiple occasions. Additionally, when he was arrested in Cambodia, Cline was found to be in possession of a laptop containing hundreds of images of child sexual abuse material.

    Supervisory Official Antoinette T. Bacon of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Acting U.S. Attorney Sara C. Sweeney for the Middle District of Florida, and Special Agent in Charge Matthew Fodor of the FBI Tampa Field Office made the announcement.

    The FBI investigated the case. The U.S. Department of State, Cambodian National Police, and Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs provided assistance.

    Trial Attorney Gwendelynn Bills of the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ilyssa Spergel and Courtney Derry for the Middle District of Florida prosecuted the case.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, visit www.justice.gov/psc.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Federal Grand Jury in Louisville Indicts Illegal Alien For Methamphetamine Trafficking and Firearms Offenses

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Louisville, KY – A federal grand jury in Louisville, Kentucky, returned an indictment on March 4, 2025, charging an illegal alien with federal drug and gun crimes.  

    U.S. Attorney Michael A. Bennett of the Western District of Kentucky, Acting Special Agent in Charge A.J. Gibes of the ATF Louisville Field Division, Special Agent in Charge Rana Saoud of Homeland Security Investigations, Sam Olson, Field Office Director for Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) Chicago, U.S. Immigration Customs, and Chief Paul Humphrey of the Louisville Metro Police Department made the announcement.

    According to the indictment, Edi Diaz-Lopez, a/k/a Edy Diaz-Lopez, age 30, a citizen of Mexico, was charged with possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking.  On January 3, 2025, Diaz-Lopez possessed a Phoenix, .25 caliber pistol, and a Bryco, model 59, 9-millimeter pistol. Diaz-Lopez was prohibited from possessing firearms because he was an alien illegally and unlawfully in the United States.

    Diaz-Lopez made his initial appearance before a United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Kentucky on March 6, 2025. He was ordered detained pending trial. If convicted, Diaz-Lopez faces a maximum sentence of 40 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors.

    There is no parole in the federal system.

    This case is being investigated by ATF, HSI, ICE/ERO, and LMPD.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Frank Dahl is prosecuting this case.

    An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Transcript of COM Regular Press Briefing, March 6, 2025

    Source: International Monetary Fund

    March 6, 2025

    SPEAKER:  Ms. Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department, IMF

     *  *  *  *  *

    MS. KOZACK: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to this IMF press briefing. It is very good to see you all, both those of you who are here in person and, of course, our colleagues online as well.

    I am Julie Kozak, Director of the Communications Department. As usual, this briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. I will start with a short announcement and then take your questions in person on Webex and via the Press Center. 

    The 2025 Spring Meetings of the IMF and World Bank Group will take place from Monday, April 21 through Saturday, April 26. Press registration to attend the spring meetings in person in Washington D.C. is now open and you can register through www.IMFconnect.org. 

    And with that, I will now open the floor for your questions. For those connecting virtually, please turn on both your camera and microphone when speaking. And with that, over to you. 

    QUESTIONER: If the Congress does not approve the future agreement, as it is established by the local law, does the IMF give the money to Argentina? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, so that is a question on Argentina. Any other questions on Argentina? I do not see any hands up in the room. Let us go online. QUESTIONER: Do you think we are already in the final stage? And what remains to announce the Staff Agreement with the IMF?

    QUESTIONER: Good morning. I was wondering about also there have been versions of a new loan up to $20 billion and the first deployment of $8 billion this year. Can you confirm that, or can you give us an insight into the fresh funds that could be coming in the new agreement? And also, when can we expect a signing of the letter of intent? 

    QUESTIONER: So, my question is about the Congress. President Milei confirmed that the staff-level agreement must be approved by the Parliament as indicated by the Argentine law. So, is that also a requirement from the IMF itself or could the President sign a decree avoiding the current law that requires the staff-level agreement to be approved by Parliament. 

    QUESTIONER: I want to ask about the scope of the potential agreement with Argentina. There are reports out saying it could be as high, or there is an expectation it could be as high as $20 billion.

    QUESTIONER: I think a few people have already asked, but when [do] you expect to reach a staff-level agreement, whether, as the Argentine government has said, it is only the final numbers that need to be agreed and not other technical aspects? And whether the IMF requires that the entirety of the SLA be reviewed by Congress for approval or if whether a general outline produced by the government will be enough? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, very good. So, with that, let me go ahead and talk about Argentina. So, first, I just want to start by saying, as I think many of you know, both the Managing Director and the First Deputy Managing Director recently met with the Argentine authorities. And as they recently emphasized, we are continuing to make good progress toward a program, and we are working constructively with the Argentine authorities in this regard. The authorities’ stabilization and growth plan is delivering significant results.

    It has made notable strides in reducing inflation, stabilizing the economy, and fostering a return to growth in the country, and poverty is finally beginning to decline in Argentina. To sustain these early gains, there is a shared understanding about the need to continue to adopt a consistent set of fiscal, monetary and exchange rate policies, while very importantly, advancing growth enhancing reforms. And the new program would build on the progress achieved so far while also addressing Argentina’s remaining challenges. 

    Now, with respect to some of the questions regarding Congressional approval, we do take note of President Milei’s commitment to seek congressional support for a new IMF supported program. As we have often said in the past, strong ownership and broad support are key to the program’s success, 

    Here, I want to emphasize, though, that securing congressional support is a decision of the authorities as legislated in Argentine domestic law. And at the same time, of course, as I just noted, broad political and social support can enhance program implementation. Questions regarding the specific process on achieving or seeking congressional support should be addressed really to the Argentine authorities because it is a matter of domestic law. 

    From our side, as I noted, the negotiations are continuing in a constructive manner. In terms of the process from the IMF side. Once the negotiations are completed, as with any IMF program or proposed program, the final arrangement, the documents, will require approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. And we will provide further updates as we have them. 

    With respect to some of the questions about the details of the negotiations, the potential size of the program. All I can say right now is this is still under discussion as part of the ongoing and constructive dialogue that we are having with the authorities. And we will provide an update when we have more information that we can share with you. 

    QUESTIONER: On Lebanon, so following recent reports that the Lebanese government is in discussions with IMF over a potential deal on its financial default in public debt. I just want to see if the IMF can confirm these reports. If so, what does it look like? Are there any contingencies to this? And will there be an IMF mission visiting Lebanon? Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Lebanon is that an IMF team will visit Lebanon very soon, March 10th to 14th. This mission is aimed at, of course, meeting the new authorities, discussing Lebanon’s recent economic developments, its reconstruction needs, and the authorities’ economic priorities in the near-term. This is a fact-finding mission that will take place. But beyond this fact-finding mission, as we look ahead, future next steps could include helping the authorities to formulate a comprehensive economic reform program.

    Our staff continues to be closely engaged with the authorities. We are providing policy advice and capacity development to help the authorities’ efforts to rebuild Lebanon’s economy and institutions in coordination with other international partners. And that is what I have for now on Lebanon. 

    QUESTIONER: I wanted to ask you about what is happening in the United States. The trade wars have begun, and we are seeing some impact already, both in terms of market reaction and a lot of volatility in the markets, ups, and downs. We are also seeing some interesting developments in terms of bond markets and yields; it is going to increase the cost of borrowing. So, I wanted to ask you if you, at this point, I know we’ve asked this question before, but I wonder if you’ve got an additional assessment, as we’re now seeing some of these policies that had been promised taking effect, and whether you can say now whether you’re expecting an impact on the global economy and also on the U.S. economy and the affected economies that have been targeted thus far — China, Canada, Mexico. 

    QUESTIONER: As a follow up to [that] question, does the IMF consider that the ongoing developments of the U.S. tariffs and trade wars would push other nations to seek more trade relations and more alliances with other economic organizations and trade organizations such as BRICS, for example, or others? And broadly speaking, what is the IMF assessment of the global fragmentation that is going on right now? Do you see that it is slowing down or opposite it is moving faster, taking into account the latest developments in the United States?

    QUESTIONER: I would like to focus on the development of 10 years of U.S. bond yield movement. The 10-year bond yield now decreased, dropping substantially. And what does it mean? What is the implication of the movement? Does it represent some U.S. recession or U.S. economy? 

    QUESTIONER: With the tariffs actually now in place, has the IMF undertook a study to determine the potential impact on small island states that are heavily dependent on flows and goods and commodities coming out of the United States, more specifically, those countries within the Caribbean region who are very much dependent and could face significant inflationary pressures based on these tariffs?

    MS. KOZACK: So, first I want to just step back a little bit to recognize that we have seen now several new and significant developments over the past few days. The U.S. has imposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico as well as additional tariffs on China. Canada and China have, in response, announced tariffs on some U.S. goods and other measures. And Mexico has indicated that it will provide more details in the coming days.

    And as we have said before, you know, while assessing the full impact of tariffs on economic activity and inflation will depend on many factors, we do expect to provide an analysis of this, certainly at the global level and for the most affected countries at the time of our World Economic Outlook update in April. And of course we will also cover this issue, I imagine, in some of the regional updates where relevant. And I want to also emphasize that as part of our bilateral surveillance with countries, the individual Article IV reports this topic will also be covered to the extent that the countries are affected. 

    What I can say today is that if sustained the impact of the U.S. tariffs on Canada and Mexico can be expected to have a significant adverse economic impact on those countries given their very strong integration and exposure to the U.S. market. 

    Now, more broadly, there were some questions about financial market movements. So let me also just step back for a moment on some of these, and here I want to refer to some remarks that our Managing Director has been making recently. As she’s been saying, we are now in the midst of significant transformations, and these include the rapid advance of AI to changing patterns of capital flows and trade. She has also been mentioning that trade is no longer the engine of global growth that it used to be. 

    For example, during the period of 2000 to 2019, global trade growth reached nearly 6 percent on an annual basis, whereas over the more recent period of 2022 to 2024, global trade is growing closer to 3 percent. So global trade growth has been on a downward — has declined. And of course, it is in this more global context that governments are recalibrating their approaches and adjusting policies. 

    I also want to recognize, of course, that we have seen increased volatility in financial markets. We see that in indicators such as the VIX. We also have seen indicators of global uncertainty showing an increase. And what will be critical to assess what the economic impact of this will be — will be whether these trends are short-lived or whether they are sustained. Generally speaking, our research shows that both historically and across countries, sustained periods of elevated uncertainty can be associated with both households and firms holding back on consumption and investment decisions. And as I said, we will be providing a comprehensive analysis of our views on the global economy and individual economies as part of the World Economic Outlook that will be released in April. 

    On the specific question on U.S. bond yields, we do recognize of course, that U.S. bond yields have moved lower since the beginning of the year. And it does seem that on that basis markets may be reappraising or reassessing their views, particularly on the outlook for monetary policy. I will stop there and move on.

    QUESTIONER: When is the IMF Board expected to review and approve the next disbursement for Ukraine? Are there any remaining conditions or procedural steps that Ukraine must fulfill before approval? And the Ukrainian government is engaging in debt restructuring efforts with its creditors. How does the IMF assess Ukraine’s debt sustainability and what role does this play in bord’s decision making process regarding future disbursement announcements?

    QUESTIONER: So, to follow up on previous question. In February, you stated, that Ukraine would have access to about U.S. $900 million for the next review. Now we are speaking about $400 million. So, why the IMF has made a decision to adjust to the total sum of disbursement that will be provided to Ukraine?

    QUESTIONER: And do you think that it can impact financial stability of Ukrainian economy or there is no risk for them? 

    QUESTIONER: How do you expect the freezing of the U.S. aid for Ukraine might impact the program you have already on course right now? And how does this affect the global plan that had been made like a year ago or two years ago now? 

    QUESTIONER: I just want to follow up the last question about the impact — what the impact Trump administration is doing. Does this impact the IMF projections on Ukraine this and next year? 

    QUESTIONER: An adjacent question, maybe related to the prospect for ending the war. And, you know, we have seen economic developments in Russia continue to percolate along even though the war has been going on and there have been sanctions. Have you started to look at what the end of the war could mean for both the Russian and Ukrainian economies in terms of, you know, perhaps, you know, assuming that there would be an end of sanctions once there was a cessation of hostilities, whether that would give a boost to the Russian economy, maybe the European economy in general could lower costs, things like that? So just kind of walk us through what you are seeing there. 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, let me go ahead on Ukraine. So, just to bring everyone up to speed. So, on February 28th, the IMF staff, and the Ukrainian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Seventh Review of the four-year EFF arrangement. This is subject to approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. Ukraine is expected to draw, as noted, about U.S. $400 million, and that would bring total disbursements under the program to U.S. $10.1 billion.

    I just want to note that program performance in Ukraine remains strong. All of the end December quantitative performance criteria were met, and understandings were reached between the Ukrainian authorities and IMF staff on a set of policies and reforms to sustain macroeconomic stability. The structural reform agenda in Ukraine is continuing to make good progress, and there are strong commitments from the Ukrainian authorities in a number of other areas. 

    Now on some of the specific questions, first on the matter of the disbursement, what I can say there is that it is not unusual over the life of a program for the pattern of disbursements to shift based on evolving balance of payments needs. And that is what has happened in this case. It is also important to emphasize that the overall size of the program, which is $15.6 billion, remains unchanged. And so that shift in disbursement pattern reflects the shifting balance of payments pattern for Ukraine. 

    So, on the issue the debt restructuring and debt process, what I can say there is that restoring debt sustainability in Ukraine hinges on continued implementation of the authority’s debt restructuring strategy, where completing the treatment of the GDP warrants remains important. And it also hinges very much on continuation of the revenue-based fiscal adjustment strategy, which is supported under the program. And as you know, Ukraine’s debt has been assessed in the last review to be sustainable on a forward-looking basis contingent on these two areas that I just mentioned. And of course, there will be a revised debt sustainability assessment as part of the ongoing review. 

    With respect to the other question, what I can say here is that the Ukrainian economy, you know, has shown continued resilience despite the challenges arising from the war. At the time of the Seventh Review, the last review, we estimated GDP growth to be 3.5 percent in 2024. But we did expect it at that time to moderate to 2 to 3 percent in 2025. And that was reflecting some headwinds from labor constraints and damage to energy infrastructure, given the ongoing war. It is the case in general for Ukraine, and we have been saying this throughout the life of the program, that the outlook remains exceptionally uncertain, especially as the war continues and it is taking a heavy toll on Ukraine’s people, economy, and infrastructure. 

    On the more recent developments that you were referring to, we are following these developments very closely. It is premature at the moment to comment on them, but we are following them, and we will make an assessment in due course.

    And on your question, the answer is essentially the same. We are following the developments very closely, and we will, as developments evolve, be undertaking obviously an assessment of what a peace deal could potentially look like and what would be the implications for all of the involved parties. 

    QUESTIONER: Julie, can you on the basis of having studied previous conflicts ending, can you just give us divorced from Ukraine and Russia, but just can you give us an indication of what generally happens when a conflict ends, what that means? And is there anything that we can draw on, at least just from history? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, I do not have, you know, off the top of my head a piece of research that I can kind of point to in terms of the interest analysis. What I certainly can say is that we always, for all of our member countries, hope for peace and stability in all of our member countries. And I think at that moment this is really what I can say. But I take note of the importance of your point, and we will, I have no doubt, in due course be conducting all of the necessary analysis as events unfold.

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions mainly on Egypt. as Egypt is scheduled for 10th of March for the discussion of the Fourth Review of the EFF for the country, what are we expecting from this meeting? And if you please, could you update us on the RSF facility worth $1.2 billion for the country? Thank you so much. 

    QUESTIONER: I would second exactly those questions. And just to add to that, I know it says on the IMF Executive Board calendar that the Board will be discussing waivers of non-observance for some of the performance criteria related to Egypt’s loan program and modifications for others. Are you able to tell us any more about exactly which criteria the Board will be looking at? And on the RSF, if you are able to give us any more detail about the prospective value of that. I know it has been put at $1 billion before. A related question, not on Egypt but on Gaza. I would be interested to know if the IMF has begun to think, whether internally or with partners in the region, about what its potential role would be in funding a reconstruction plan for Gaza given the $50 billion, upwards of $50 billion, cost of any reconstruction. 

    QUESTIONER: I may repeat questions about the value of current tranche to be given to Egypt and the timing of when the central bank of Egypt to receive it. And also, I have another question about the program of state assets selling. Will we witness some steps, new steps in that program? Could it be connected with the decision to be taken in March?

    MS. KOZACK: And any other questions on Egypt? All right. And then I have a question that came in through the Press Center. I am going to read it out loud – ’Does the IMF’s approval of the fourth tranche to Egypt require Egypt to implement some reforms? And when will the Fifth Review of the loan be held? What is the estimated size of the loan allocated to Egypt, and here will it be dispersed in installments or in one lump sum?’

    On Egypt – on March 10th, our Executive Board will be discussing Egypt’s Article IV consultation and the fourth review under the EFF. It will also be discussing at the same time Egypt’s request for an RSF, the Resilience and Sustainability Facility. Subject to completion by the Executive Board, the authorities, would have access to $1.2 billion under the EFF. So, under the EFF program. And then in addition, subject again to approval by our Executive Board, the size of the RSF would be about U.S. $1.3 billion. Regarding the RSF, like all of the IMF programs, the RSF is also delivered in tranches. So, it is not one lump sum up front. It is a phased program where tranches are dispersed on the basis of conditions being met. 

    And with respect to some of the other questions, what I can say today is just that we will provide, of course, more details following the Board meeting and on the question of waivers and modifications and also the questions on the state-owned enterprises. And again, the board meeting will be on March 10th. 

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions related to Japan. Firstly, amid rising uncertainty due to President Trump’s tariff policy, I would like to ask you — ask your thoughts on whether the Bank of Japan, currently in a rate hike phase, should continue raising rate or take more cautious approach in assessing the impact. And secondly, President Trump recently made remarks suggesting that Japan and China are engaging in currency devaluation. I would appreciate it if you share your views on Japan’s foreign exchange policy. Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, maybe just stepping back to give a bit of context on Japan. What I can say on Japan is that on the growth side, growth this year is expected to strengthen, and we also expect inflation to converge to the Bank of Japan’s 2 percent target by the end of 2025. 

    In 2024, growth in Japan slowed due to some temporary supply disruptions. But since then, we have seen a strengthening in growth driven by domestic demand, particular — particularly private consumption in Japan and rising wages. And we expect this to continue into 2025, where we project growth, at the time of the January WEO, we projected growth at 1.1 percent for Japan in 2025. And of course, just to say that we will be updating this projection as part of the April forecast. 

    Looking at inflation — headline and core inflation, as I said, are expected to decline gradually toward the 2 percent target. We have been supportive of the Bank of Japan’s recent monetary policy decisions. We believe that these decisions will help anchor inflation expectations at the 2 percent target but also given balance risks around inflation, our assessment has been that further hikes in the policy interest rate should continue to be data dependent, and they should proceed at a gradual pace over time. 

     With respect to the question on the exchange rate, what I can say there is that the Japanese authorities have affirmed their commitment to a flexible exchange rate regime. Japan’s flexible exchange rate regime has helped the country or has helped the economy absorb the impact of shocks. And it also supports the focus of monetary policy on price stability. And at the same time, what I can say is that that flexible exchange rate regime is helping maintain an external position that is in line with fundamentals. 

    QUESTIONER: Could you give us an update on the negotiations for Ethiopia, please? And on El Salvador, the deal that you agreed on in December and was approved a couple of weeks ago involves the government not increasing its exposure to Bitcoin. Government has continued to buy through the Office of Bitcoin, which is linked to the presidential palace. But yesterday the Fund said that these purchases do not increase the government’s exposure to Bitcoin. Could you please explain that? 

    QUESTIONER: Also on El Salvador, obviously he was saying to not to not buy it as a government reserve. I just wanted to, I guess, contrast to the U.S. I mean, President Trump has very much announced a digital assets reserve, including Ethereum and other coins, as well as Bitcoin. And I wondered if the IMF could – can you comment on the U.S. program or how would you distinguish the two countries and why the IMF might be taking a different approach?

    MS. KOZACK: All right, let me go ahead and take the El Salvador question in Ethiopia and then we will go back. I see many hands up online. 

    So, on El Salvador, as you know, last week our Executive Board approved a 40-month Extended Fund Facility, EFF, for U.S. $1.4 billion and with an immediate disbursement of $113 million. The program is expected to catalyze financial and technical support from other IFIs. And this will lead to a combined total over the program period of about U.S. $3.5 billion of support for El Salvador. The goals of the program are to restore fiscal sustainability, rebuild external and financial buffers, strengthen governance and transparency, and ultimately create the conditions for stronger and more resilient growth. 

    Regarding Bitcoin, in particular, the program aims to address the risks associated with the Bitcoin project to protect consumers and investors, as well as to limit potential fiscal costs. So, to start, there were recent legal reforms that have made the acceptance of Bitcoin voluntary, and taxes can be paid only in U.S. dollars. Under the program, the government has committed to not accumulate for their Bitcoins at the level of the overall public sector. 

    Regarding the recent increase in Bitcoin holding by the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund, the authorities have confirmed that these are consistent with the agreed program conditionality, and we do remain engaged with the authorities on this important issue. 

    And then, to your question. We are obviously closely monitoring President Trump’s announcement in this area. The Presidential Working Group on Digital Asset Markets has not yet completed its work. So, we do not yet have details on the implementation of this proposal, but we will come back in due course. 

    And then turning to the question on Ethiopia. So just an update on Ethiopia. On January 17th, the IMF Executive Board completed the Second Review of the arrangement, the ECF arrangement for Ethiopia, and that allowed for a drawdown of about U.S. $245 million. The ECF arrangement supports the authorities’ reforms to address macroeconomic imbalances, restore external debt sustainability, and lay the foundation for strong private sector-led growth. 

    I can also just remind you that the Managing Director recently traveled to Ethiopia. She was there February 8th and 9th. She met with Prime Minister Abiy and his team to take stock of the economic reforms and the progress that is being made in the country. And she also took the opportunity to meet with other stakeholders, including representatives of the private sector. 

    QUESTIONER: My question is on USAID. USAID has now totally stopped its business. And to what extent do you see the impact, especially on lower income countries at the global level? And should you consider using your facility to support them just in case? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on this issue, we are obviously again paying close attention to developments, and we are working with our country authorities. But it is, at the same time, it is too early to really say what the precise impact may be. And so, we will come back in due course. For now, we are monitoring.

    QUESTIONER: I have a question on Senegal. Following a recent audit of the country’s debt, it was found to be 99.7 percent of GDP. That was in 2023. And I know that IMF has said before that Senegal debt was stable even though it was high. I am wondering if that is the figure that you still consider sustainable. And then also with regards on talks of a new IMF program, I am wondering if Senegal could be asked to reimburse previous dispersion under this reporting period. 

    QUESTIONER: Still on Senegal, as soon as the report from the Audit Supreme Court was released, we saw rating agency downgrading Senegal sovereign notes. So, the country is now stuck. It cannot raise funds from the internal market, and it cannot go in a very comfortable position in international markets while they still face a lot of challenges. So, I am wondering why the IMF is working fast and bold to find a solution for Senegal in the midterm or even long-term. Is there any situation where IMF can provide a short-term, I mean, short-term relief to the country so they can go through these hard moments in a very soft way? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on Senegal, what I can say is that we are actively engaged in discussions with the authorities with respect to the Court of Auditors Report and the associated misreporting under the IMF program. The Court of Auditors Report was released on February 12th. The Court confirmed that the fiscal deficit and debt were under reported during the period of 2019 to 2023.

    So, what we are doing is working closely with the authorities in their efforts to preserve fiscal and debt sustainability. We are working actively to advance on our discussions following the publication of the report, and we are also working with the authorities on measures to correct and remedy the misreporting that took place. What I can add is that the resolution of the misreporting in line with IMF policy is a precondition for discussions of any future financial assistance by the IMF.

    And with respect to potential consequences, I can say that the IMF does not impose any sanctions for misreporting cases. It is up to our Executive Board to decide on the next steps. And those next steps, you know, could include a waiver. And that waiver could — it could also include; it could be a waiver without a request for reimbursement. So, all of those discussions on Senegal are now underway. We are actively, very much working with the authorities, supporting as much as possible their efforts on fiscal and debt sustainability, as I said. And we will come back and report back when we have more information on Senegal. 

    I have a question here online that I am going to read. It came from the Press Center on Thailand. And the question is – ‘The upcoming World Bank IMF Annual Meetings in Thailand will bring significant attention to Southeast Asia’s economic outlook. From the from IMF’s perspective, how can Thailand best leverage this opportunity to address regional challenges such as digital transformation, climate change adaptation, and income inequality? And what collaborative initiatives between the IMF and Thailand are being planned to ensure lasting economic benefits for the country beyond the meetings themselves?’ 

    So, on this very important question, a very nice question, actually, what I can say is that we are very much looking forward to having Thailand host the annual meetings in 2026. So, this will be in October of 2026. Every three years, we do our Annual Meetings abroad. 2026, October will be Thailand. So, mark your calendar. I can also add that preparations are underway. The Fund, the IMF staff are working hand in hand with the Thai authorities to make this a highly successful event and showcasing the significant strides that Thailand has made since it last hosted our annual meetings in 1991. So, it will be 25 years when we get to 2026. 

    The Managing Director recently met with Bank of Thailand’s Governor Sethaput at the AlUla Conference in Saudi Arabia. They discussed the preparations for the annual meetings and agreed that it would be a very good opportunity to showcase on the global stage the region’s dynamism and economic activities. And of course, the meetings will also allow Thailand to position itself as a key contributor to the international economic dialogue and to gather views and experiences from countries throughout the membership of the IMF and the World Bank. 

    This ongoing close relationship leading up to and beyond, we hope, the Annual Meetings will focus on prioritizing reform reforms that are necessary to ensure the lasting benefits for Thailand and building the relationships and the shared policy, dialogue and experiences we hope will deepen our engagement, our excellent engagement and relationship with Thailand and will be sustained even past the Annual Meetings in 2026.

    QUESTIONER: My question is, what are the IMF growth projections for Jordan amid the ongoing impact of the Gaza war? And when will the Third Review under the EFF begin? And are any adjustments expected to the war’s region effect on Jordan’s economy? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Jordan is that the Executive Board on December 12th completed the Article IV Consultation with Jordan and the Second Review under the EFF arrangement. The mission for the next review, which will be the Third Review, is expected to take place in April.

    What I can also say is that Jordan has demonstrated resilience and maintained macroeconomic stability throughout the prolonged regional conflict. This resilience reflects the authority’s continued implementation of sound macroeconomic policies and progress with reforms. While recent developments in the region, particularly the ceasefire agreements, give rise to some cautious optimism, uncertainty, of course, in Jordan does remain high. And with respect to the growth projections, what I can say is that growth in 2024 was 2.3 percent. We are projecting growth at 2.5 percent in 2025 and a further increase in growth in 2026 to 3 percent. But like in all countries, we will be updating these projections as both part of our April World Economic Outlook Global Forecast, and also, of course, the team will be doing a full assessment of the Jordanian economy as part of their mission in April 

    And so, with this, I’m going to bring this press briefing to a close. Thank you all very much. Thank you very much for participating today. As a reminder, the briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. The transcript, as always, will be made available later today on IMF.org. And in case of clarifications or additional questions, please reach out to my colleagues at media@IMF.org. And I wish everyone a wonderful day, and I look forward to seeing you next time. Thank you very much. 

     

    * * * * *

     

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Boris Balabanov

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Hassan, Cramer, Gillibrand, and Collins Reintroduce Bipartisan Legislation to Strengthen Northern Border Security

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Maggie Hassan
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH), a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee, Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), and Susan Collins (R-ME) reintroduced bipartisan legislation to strengthen security at the Northern border by requiring the Department of Homeland Security to regularly complete a new Northern Border Threat Analysis and update its Northern Border Strategy. Even though criminal activity continues to evolve along the Northern border, there has not been a Northern Border Threat Analysis conducted since 2017, and the Northern Border Strategy has not been updated since 2018. 
    “Strengthening security of our Northern border is vital to keeping both New Hampshire and our country safe,” said Senator Hassan. “This bipartisan legislation will require regular assessments of our Northern border security to prevent criminal activity. I will continue to work closely with law enforcement officials at our Northern border to provide them with the tools and resources that they need to combat these evolving threats and keep our communities safe.” 
    “With the United States and Canada sharing the world’s longest border, our economic and national security interests are intertwined,” said Senator Cramer. “National security threats are not restricted to the southern border so a comprehensive approach is necessary. I joined Senator Hassan in introducing the Northern Border Security Enhancement and Review Act to ensure the dependability and safety of our shared border for the families and communities who live on both sides of the border.”
    “Customs and Border Protection agents have struggled to address a dramatic increase in the number of unauthorized crossings at our northern border,” said Senator Gillibrand. “This bill is a commonsense, bipartisan measure to give federal law enforcement and congressional leaders more data and strategic direction to address the situation, which will help protect our national security. I am proud to cosponsor this bill, and I look forward to working across the aisle to get it passed.”
    “Our border security policies must address the unique challenges along the U.S.-Canada border, where vast, remote areas make enforcement difficult,” said Senator Collins. “By improving data collection and oversight of threats and enforcement efforts, this bipartisan bill would strengthen security, improve coordination, and help to ensure we have the resources needed to protect our northern border effectively.”
    This legislation is part of Senator Hassan’s ongoing efforts to strengthen border security. Last year, the Senate Homeland Security Committee advanced bipartisan legislation introduced by Senator Hassan to allow U.S. and Canadian personnel to jointly patrol both sides of the Northern border on aircraft, helping better combat drug smuggling and other illegal cross-border activities. In December, Senator Hassan worked with her colleagues to pass into law her bipartisan legislation to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security and its contractors are operating as effectively as possible at the Southern border. Additionally, earlier this year, the DETECT Fentanyl and Xylazine Act, a bipartisan bill backed by Senator Hassan that empowers law enforcement with research, information, and technologies to find and eliminate illegal deadly drugs, was signed into law.  

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Adjusts Tariffs on Canada and Mexico to Minimize Disruption to the Automotive Industry

    Source: The White House

    USING LEVERAGE TO PROTECT AMERICANS: Today, President Donald J. Trump announced adjustments to tariffs imposed on imports from Canada and Mexico in recognition of the structure of the automotive supply chain that strives to bring production into America.

    • Duties imposed to address the flow of illicit drugs across our borders are now:
      • 25% tariffs on goods that do not satisfy U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) rules of origin.
      • A lower 10% tariff on those energy products imported from Canada that fall outside the USMCA preference.
      • A lower 10% tariff on any potash imported from Canada and Mexico that falls outside the USMCA preference.
      • No tariffs on those goods from Canada and Mexico that claim and qualify for USMCA preference.
    • While the situations at our Northern and Southern borders continue to require appropriate action from the Governments of Canada and Mexico, our American automotive industry, which provides American jobs, should not suffer significant disruption just because of the structure of its supply chain.

    ENSURING BORDER SECURITY AND ECONOMIC SECURITY: President Trump will not allow our national security to be compromised by our closest trading partners, Canada and Mexico, but recognizes the unique impact that these tariffs could have on American automotive manufacturers.

    • President Trump will never stop standing up for the safety of the American people and is using tariffs as a tool to take decisive actions that put Americans’ safety and our national security first. 
    • On Tuesday, March 4, tariffs were issued on Canada and Mexico under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to curb the flow of illegal border crossings and drugs into our country.
    • In order to minimize disruption to the U.S. automotive industry and workers, it is appropriate to adjust the tariffs on articles of Canada and Mexico so that they do not bear a disproportionate brunt of Canada and Mexico’s failure to respond to the crises at our borders.
    • America’s manufacturers, including our automakers, have strengthened our economy and expanded our workforce.
    • Today’s actions promote a level playing field for American manufacturers, bringing supply chains closer to home, especially for our auto industry, which has been hit hard by offshoring.

    DEALMAKER-IN-CHIEF: President Trump continues to leverage America’s economic power to secure our border and stop the flow of fentanyl into our country, while protecting American industry.

    • In November, President Trump promised that tariffs on Mexico and Canada would remain in effect until drugs and illegal aliens stop invading our country.
    • Following the President imposing tariffs on both countries, Mexico and Canada announced measures to combat illegal immigration and fentanyl trafficking.
    • President Trump secured the extradition of 29 Mexican drug cartel bosses to face charges for their crimes in the United States, including one accused of killing a DEA agent.
    • In President Trump’s first month in office, illegal border crossings plummeted to the lowest level ever recorded, down 96% from the all-time high under the Biden-Harris Administration.

    As President Trump stated in the America First Trade Policy Presidential Memorandum, trade policy is an integral component of our economic and national security

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Addressing Risks from Perkins Coie LLP

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-left”>By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

    Section 1. Purpose. The dishonest and dangerous activity of the law firm Perkins Coie LLP (“Perkins Coie”) has affected this country for decades. Notably, in 2016 while representing failed Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Perkins Coie hired Fusion GPS, which then manufactured a false “dossier” designed to steal an election. This egregious activity is part of a pattern. Perkins Coie has worked with activist donors including George Soros to judicially overturn popular, necessary, and democratically enacted election laws, including those requiring voter identification. In one such case, a court was forced to sanction Perkins Coie attorneys for an unethical lack of candor before the court.

    In addition to undermining democratic elections, the integrity of our courts, and honest law enforcement, Perkins Coie racially discriminates against its own attorneys and staff, and against applicants. Perkins Coie publicly announced percentage quotas in 2019 for hiring and promotion on the basis of race and other categories prohibited by civil rights laws. It proudly excluded applicants on the basis of race for its fellowships, and it maintained these discriminatory practices until applicants harmed by them finally sued to enforce change.

    My Administration is committed to ending discrimination under “diversity, equity, and inclusion” policies and ensuring that Federal benefits support the laws and policies of the United States, including those laws and policies promoting our national security and respecting the democratic process. Those who engage in blatant race-based and sex-based discrimination, including quotas, but purposefully hide the nature of such discrimination through deceiving language, have engaged in a serious violation of the public trust. Their disrespect for the bedrock principle of equality represents good cause to conclude that they neither have access to our Nation’s secrets nor be deemed responsible stewards of any Federal funds.

    Sec. 2. Security Clearance Review. (a) The Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, and all other relevant heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall immediately take steps consistent with applicable law to suspend any active security clearances held by individuals at Perkins Coie, pending a review of whether such clearances are consistent with the national interest.

    (b) The Office of Management and Budget shall identify all Government goods, property, material, and services, including Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities, provided for the benefit of Perkins Coie. The heads of all agencies providing such material or services shall, to the extent permitted by law, expeditiously cease such provision.

    Sec. 3. Contracting. (a) To prevent the transfer of taxpayer dollars to Federal contractors whose earnings subsidize, among other things, racial discrimination, falsified documents designed to weaponize the Government against candidates for office, and anti-democratic election changes that invite fraud and distrust, Government contracting agencies shall, to the extent permissible by law, require Government contractors to disclose any business they do with Perkins Coie and whether that business is related to the subject of the Government contract.

    (b) The heads of all agencies shall review all contracts with Perkins Coie or with entities that disclose doing business with Perkins Coie under subsection (a) of this section. To the extent permitted by law, the heads of agencies shall:

    (i) take appropriate steps to terminate any contract, to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, including the Federal Acquisition Regulation, for which Perkins Coie has been hired to perform any service;

    (ii) otherwise align their agency funding decisions with the interests of the citizens of the United States; with the goals and priorities of my Administration as expressed in executive actions, especially Executive Order 14147 of January 20, 2025 (Ending the Weaponization of the Federal Government); and as heads of agencies deem appropriate. Within 30 days of the date of this order, all agencies shall submit to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget an assessment of contracts with Perkins Coie or with entities that do business with Perkins Coie effective as of the date of this order and any actions taken with respect to those contracts in accordance with this order.

    Sec. 4. Racial Discrimination. (a) The Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall review the practices of representative large, influential, or industry leading law firms for consistency with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including whether large law firms: reserve certain positions, such as summer associate spots, for individuals of preferred races; promote individuals on a discriminatory basis; permit client access on a discriminatory basis; or provide access to events, trainings, or travel on a discriminatory basis.

    (b) The Attorney General, in coordination with the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and in consultation with State Attorneys General as appropriate, shall investigate the practices of large law firms as described in subsection (a) of this section who do business with Federal entities for compliance with race-based and sex-based non-discrimination laws and take any additional actions the Attorney General deems appropriate in light of the evidence uncovered.

    Sec. 5. Personnel. (a) The heads of all agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law, provide guidance limiting official access from Federal Government buildings to employees of Perkins Coie when such access would threaten the national security of or otherwise be inconsistent with the interests of the United States. In addition, the heads of all agencies shall provide guidance limiting Government employees acting in their official capacity from engaging with Perkins Coie employees to ensure consistency with the national security and other interests of the United States.

    (b) Agency officials shall, to the extent permitted by law, refrain from hiring employees of Perkins Coie, absent a waiver from the head of the agency, made in consultation with the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, that such hire will not threaten the national security of the United States.

    Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

    (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

    (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

    (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

    (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

                        DONALD J. TRUMP

    THE WHITE HOUSE,
    March 6, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth Greets the United Kingdom’s Secretary of State for Defence John Healey and Takes Questions From the Press

    Source: United States Department of Defense

    SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH: Well, Mr. Secretary, your entire delegation, welcome to the Pentagon. It’s great to see you. It was wonderful to meet you the first time in Brussels, and have some great interactions about our mutual interest, no doubt. And your prime minister, it was a privilege to meet him as well. He was here last week. Our nations, as you know, share a long and special relationship. Stronger today than ever before. I experienced that firsthand myself, as many of our generation has, on the battlefield, shoulder-to-shoulder with British troops in Afghanistan. I know how capable they are, how tough they are, and how close our bond is as brothers across the Atlantic, full stop.

    And so we are grateful for oh the many years that we have stood by each other’s side. And at the same, we are in the middle of a dynamic security environment, where on that continent, President Trump is calling on our European allies to take the lead, and you have done just that, sir. In fact, you chaired the first meeting of the Ukraine defense contact group that I had a pleasure to speak to. That was your first time as chair, and you’ll continue to it. And that’s, again, the United Kingdom stepping up.

    And then, once again, when your prime minister was here, you called me, we had a chance to speak briefly about the increase in defense spending that the U.K. is undertaking. So U.K. leadership is absolutely critical, and we very much appreciate it. We want to work together to achieve peace and security in Europe by working to bring an end to the war in Ukraine, building sustainable deterrence on the continent, and then increasing our allied capabilities and interoperability.

    And European leadership of NATO, led by the U.K., led by others, is, we believe, the future of defense on the continent, ensuring we provide a peaceful future for your kids and my kids and your grandkids and my grandkids. That’s ultimately what it’s about. I also want to thank the British people for the warm support they give to US forces stationed in the U.K. as well. It’s a long-standing relationship that we are very grateful for. So, you’re true allies, longtime friends. We’re new friends, but we’re getting there, and fellow warriors, so thank you very much for being here, Mr. Secretary.

    SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE JOHN HEALEY: Mr. Secretary, thank you for such a warm welcome and such warm words. It’s great to be back in Washington, and it’s good to see you again. We last met last month in NATO, and then you challenged Europe to step up. You challenged us to step up on Ukraine, on defense spending, on European security. And I say to you that we have, we are, and we will further. And last week, the British prime minister announced the biggest increase in defense spending since the end of the Cold War, and we will go further.

    You also asked the U.K. to step up on leadership on Ukraine alongside the U.S., and indeed, you were with me when we had the 46 nations round the table at a week’s notice at the Ukraine Contact Group. Our meeting today follows very good discussions between President Trump and Prime Minister Starmer a week ago today, in which they both pledged to work together, our nations would work together to secure lasting peace in Ukraine. And we have a chance today to discuss the progress on that path to peace, with the opportunity that President Trump has created now since the 20th of January.

    When your president and my prime minister met last week, your president also said that the U.K. and the U.S. have a relationship like no other, and I think for me, that was exemplified last night at the British Embassy, when we were able to lay on a party to celebrate the 250th birthday of the U.S. Marine Corps. And for more than a century, your U.S. Marines and our Royal Marines have trained together. They fought together, and too often they’ve died together, defending the values that our two free nations share.

    And Pete, as you say, you know that from your own experience and your own service. And in many ways, for me, they embody the sort of warrior force that both you and I as defense secretaries are dedicated in our roles to strengthen because we know that we have to strengthen together with allies, deterrence in the face of rising threats.

    And finally, if I may, you’ve spoken about the deep bond between our two nations, and I’d say to you, I’m here today to strengthen that defense and security bond between our two nations. It’s needed now more than ever in this new era that we must face together. So thank you for receiving us and thank you for welcoming our delegation and I look forward to the discussions ahead.

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: And to that, I say, amen. Thank you. Appreciate you being here. If it’s OK, we’ll take a few questions for either myself or the secretary.

    Pentagon Press Secretary John Ullyot : We’ll take two from the U.S. press, and we’ll take two from the British press. Go with the U.S.

    Q: Mr. Secretary, you have said that Europe needs to do more to contribute to defense. Is a security guarantee of troops from France and the U.K. enough for Ukraine?

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: I think it’s been very encouraging to watch our friends in the U.K. and in France step up to say they are prepared to take the lead to ensure an enduring peace in Ukraine. What the president has also said time and time again is, let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Let’s get both sides to the table. Let’s get a commitment to peace, and that is what President Trump is actively doing, both with the Russians and Vladimir Putin and also the Ukrainians and Zelenskyy. So, there will be…in order to maintain enduring peace, there’s a security aspect to it. The U.K. and France have pledged, along with others, to be the core part of that, there will be other aspects that are part of further terms of the negotiation.

    Mr. Ullyot: British press. Go ahead.

    Q: Mr. Secretary, there are reports that a negotiating team will be going to Saudi Arabia next week. Given a renewed push for peace, will you reconsider resupplying Ukraine with weapons, or have the taps been turned off permanently?

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: As the president has pointed out, it is a pause. Exactly what he said from the beginning, pause pending a true commitment to a path to peace. The president is paying a very keen eye to precisely what the Ukrainians are saying and doing about committing to that peace process, and we’re very encouraged by the signs we’re seeing. Ultimately, he will make the determination, but it is a pause for now.

    Q: Thank you.

    Mr. Ullyot: U.S. press.

    Q: Missy Ryan, Washington Post. Secretary Healey, a question for you. Obviously, you both have referenced this strong, historic relationship. At the same time, what does it mean for the U.K. that its closest ally is now voicing the same narrative that Russia is voicing, vis a vis the war in Ukraine and seeming to align itself more closely with Russia versus what it has done in the past?

    SECRETARY HEALEY: Look, first of all, I don’t believe as members of government and decision takers, we’re the people to comment on every twist and turn in this process. I’m fixed on the historic opportunity the president has created to bring a lasting and secure peace to Ukraine. That’s what he and my prime minister dedicated themselves to do last week. And you’ve seen since then, the British prime minister pulled together in London, leaders of 18 nations to discuss the detail of a path to peace. And the president also has asked Europe to step up, and we are.

    The U.K. is ready to take on a leadership in that task. You saw that from Keir Starmer at the weekend, in the way that he is pulling the parties together, ensuring that we take Ukraine with us and that we work closely alongside the United States. And it’s the detail of those discussions which are rightly behind the scenes that the defense secretary and I will now pursue this afternoon.

    Mr. Ullyot: Last question from Danielle with the U.K. press.

    Q: Yeah. Thank you so much. Danielle [inaudible] Daily Telegraph. This is for both secretaries. What’s the plan if the Ukrainian Front line falls apart in the next couple of days? Does Britain, Europe have permission to intervene and help? And secondly, if I may, does Britain have the ability to use its nuclear deterrent by itself?

    SECRETARY HEALEY: Nobody who has been to Ukraine, who has talked with Ukraine, who has worked with the Ukrainian leaders, or met the Ukrainian servicemen and women, or the civilians, believe that they will not fight, nor do I or the prime minister doubt that as President Zelenskyy has said, they are ready to sign the important economic deal with the U.S. They are ready for a ceasefire. They want the guarantees and the security that must follow to ensure that they will not again face Russian invasion and Russian aggression. But they, like we, are willing to work to make the most of this unique opportunity that we now have, and that’s a responsibility on all of us. And that is very clear from our prime minister. It’s clear from the president. It’s also clear from President Zelenskyy, too.

    And as far as your question about nuclear, it is a question that it will be unthinkable and unprecedented for any defense secretary or any government to start commenting on or speculating on.

    SECRETARY HEGSETH: We are watching, obviously very closely, the front line of troops. I mean, our chairman our defense department, of course, we monitor that very closely. But ultimately, we’re interested in creating the conditions for peace. I mean, to the previous question from the Washington Post, the press is interested in narratives. Our president is interested in peace. So, we will get characterized one way or another, oh, your stance is pro Russia or pro…it’s all garbage. The president got elected to bring peace in this conflict, and he is working with both sides in a way that only President Trump can. Let’s be clear, only President Trump can, to bring them to the table to end the killing. And I can tell you from being behind the scenes, he is laser-focused on making that happen, and we’re closer today than we’ve ever been because of his leadership. Thank you very much.

    Mr. Ullyot: Thank you very much, press.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Polis to Attend Denver’s First Ever Smart Stair Housing Competition, Smart Stair Apartments: Smart For Safety, Supply, and Affordability

    Source: US State of Colorado

    DENVER – Today, Governor Polis will attend Denver’s first ever Single Stair Housing competition. Designs will be judged on how they use Single-Stair, or Smart-Stair apartments, to create more housing people can afford, while enhancing the walkability and liveability of neighborhoods. Governor Polis called for Smart Stair reform in his 2025 State of the State address and will join Denver’s first Single-Stair Housing Challenge Awards, a competition of single stair apartment designs that use this strategy to increase housing options Coloradans can afford while enhancing walkability and liveability in our neighborhoods. The event begins tonight at 5 pm MT and will be held at 1550, Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202.

    Pew Research shows that Single-Stairway Apartments, also known as Smart-Stair, have a strong safety record and produce lower-cost homes. Governor Polis called for smart stair reform in his 2025 State of the State address, to increase the supply of housing people can afford in the neighborhoods where people want to live.

    “In Colorado we continue to lead the way to create more housing people can afford where we want to live. The cost of housing is a top concern for hardworking Coloradans. We know that city block sized apartments alone will not solve the housing shortage, and that is why we are removing government barriers to empower builders to build homes people can afford that fit in our neighborhoods,” said Governor Polis.

    Smart Stair buildings, residential buildings of 5 stories or less served by a single stairwell, take up less space, cost less to build, create more 2-4 bedroom units for families, and are safe for residents. Adding a single additional stairwell can increase building costs by 6-13%. Single Stair Apartments increase natural light for residents, can reduce cooling costs by up to 80%, and significantly reduce the distance between each resident and the closest exit.

    HB25-1273, Residential Building Stair Modernization, sponsored by Representatives Andrew Boesenecker and Steven Woodrow, and Senators Matt Ball and Nick Hinrichsen, would allow Smart Stair buildings to be built in Colorado, increasing housing Coloradans can afford, and empowering builders to build homes Coloradans can afford that fit in the neighborhoods where people want to live.

    “Expensive land costs are a huge barrier to building housing, and if we want to effectively address the housing crisis, we have to be strategic about how we utilize the space we have available to build housing that people can afford. From sprinkler systems to fire-hardened building materials, we have more tools at our disposal to protect Coloradans from building fires without requiring more than one stairwell in smaller complexes. I’m excited to work alongside my fellow bill sponsors and Gov. Polis on legislation that would modernize Colorado building codes to build more safe housing options that hardworking Coloradans can afford,” said Speaker Pro Tempore Andy Boesenecker, D-Fort Collins.

    “This PEW study confirms what we knew as we crafted this legislation – we can create more housing at a price Coloradans can afford while keeping our communities safe. Colorado Democrats have taken a multi-pronged approach to make housing more affordable, including the transit-oriented communities policy I sponsored last year that encourages local governments to build high-density housing near transit hubs, job centers, retail, and restaurants. Our recently introduced bill would build on this work by allowing small- and medium-sized apartment complexes to build one stairwell, making room for more units in price ranges that hardworking Coloradans can afford,” said Rep. Steven Woodrow, D-Denver.

    “Single-stair buildings are a safe and practical solution that make it far easier to build family-sized apartments,” said Senator Matt Ball, D-Denver, sponsor of HB25-1273. “The Denver Single-Stair Housing Challenge proves that, in addition to their safety and efficiency, single-stair buildings can be impressive architectural additions to our neighborhoods. I’m proud to sponsor legislation that modernizes our building codes and positions Colorado at the forefront of innovative solutions to our housing crisis.”

    “Colorado is facing a housing crisis and we must explore every option to build more homes that families can afford,” said Senator Nick Hinrichsen, D-Pueblo, sponsor of HB25-1273. “Modernizing outdated building codes to allow for single-stair apartment buildings is a simple and effective solution that will open up opportunities to build more affordable housing and revitalize our neighborhoods. This legislation is a critical way that we can increase housing supply, drive down costs, and ensure that every Coloradan has a safe, affordable place to call home.”

    ###

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Polis Applauds Court Decision To Bar Trump Administration From Illegally Withholding Federal Funding from States

    Source: US State of Colorado

    DENVER – Today, Governor Polis applauded Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island’s decision to bar the Trump Administration from illegally withholding federal funding to States.

    “The administration’s actions blocked investments critical to the U.S. economy and halted important funding and services necessary for our way of life. I am glad to see our justice system protecting the American people and our rule of law. This court decision will ensure states have access to important funding for disaster relief, transportation, childcare and family support, veterans, and initiatives. In Colorado, we are committed to protecting freedoms, saving people money, and building a Colorado for all,” said Governor Polis

    Colorado joined a 22-state lawsuit to block the Trump Administration actions to withhold critical federal funding, and was successful in obtaining a Temporary Restraining Order on January 31, 2025 that temporarily blocked the administration’s actions while litigation ensued. Today’s decision to grant a Preliminary Injunction barring the federal funding freeze further protects obligations of the federal government to the states.

    ###
     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Transcript on Dismantling the Department of Education

    Source: US State of New York

    arlier today, Governor Kathy Hochul joined a virtual press conference with education leaders on President Trump’s Executive Order dismantling the Department of Education.

    VIDEO: The event is available to stream on YouTube here and TV quality video is available here (h.264, mp4).

    AUDIO: The Governor’s remarks are available in audio form here.

    A rush transcript of the Governor’s remarks is available below:

     Denise, thank you so much. And I know we’ll be hearing from Becky Pringle. I want to thank her for extraordinary work as the president of NEA. And also joining you is someone that I’m extremely fond of, Barack Obama’s Secretary of Education, who I was able to snag to become our Chancellor of our entire State University System, Chancellor John King. So you do have an all-star cast here. But I think about casts and performances. Think about the fact that Donald Trump could have picked anybody he wanted to be the Secretary of Education. A lot of talented people out there who are dedicated to our children. Now, who did he pick? He picked a pro-wrestling mogul who is in the process of body slamming our Department of Education.

    So, what does that mean for a place like New York? Five billion dollars in cuts. We’re talking about billions of dollars lost in Pell Grants, money for kids with disabilities, programs that are helping our kids in rural areas, and mental health. I mean, what they’re doing is saying our kids don’t matter. What’s more important is that we slash for the sake of slashing, and also be able to fund tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires.

    So instead of supporting a math class, they’re supporting tax breaks for the buddies at Mar-a-Lago. So that’s the reality we’re dealing with here in New York. And I have to give some news to everybody — and this is a message from all the governors: We’re not going to be able to backfill losses like this scale — $5 billion. So the children are going to suffer. But there’s only one way to reverse this before the next presidential election, and that is in the midterms. That is what happens in 2026, and that’s another whole topic, but that’s what I’m laser focused on is building a firewall in the House of Representatives at least, and possibly the Senate, so we can stop the insanity and put our focus on the kids.

    What we do now with this generation of kids is going to make a difference for generations to come because it’s an investment in the future workforce. And we are in global competition with other countries. And if we stop these investments now, then we’re basically saying, “We give up. We’re not even going to compete.”

    I’m not going to stand for that here in the State of New York. So, as always, I’m calling on teachers and advocates and parents and students. Use your voices and stand up and scream from the mountaintops. This must stop. And I want to shame them into everything they’re contemplating and doing and saying, “Don’t do this to our kids. I’m New York’s first mom Governor, so anything that happens to our children is personal to me.”

    So that’s my message from New York.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Bimini Capital Management Announces Fourth Quarter 2024 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    VERO BEACH, Fla., March 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bimini Capital Management, Inc. (OTCQB: BMNM), (“Bimini Capital,” “Bimini,” or the “Company”), today announced results of operations for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024.

    Fourth Quarter 2024 Highlights

    • Net loss of $1.5 million, or $0.15 per common share
    • Book value per share of $0.68
    • Company to discuss results on Friday, March 7, 2025, at 10:00 AM ET

    Management Commentary

    Commenting on the fourth quarter results, Robert E. Cauley, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, said, “The outlook for the fixed income market pivoted early in the fourth quarter of 2024. As the third quarter came to an end, inflation was falling towards the Fed’s 2% target, the labor market was cooling as hiring levels moderated and the unemployment rate was slowly creeping higher, and the Fed had finally lowered the Fed Funds rate by 50 basis points. At the time, the market expected the Fed to lower the rate by over 200 basis points over the next 18 months. As we know, beginning early in the fourth quarter, the incoming data turned. Even as the economic outlook shifted, the Fed did lower the Fed Funds rate two more times during 2024 – by 25 basis points in each case. With the Fed Funds rate lowered by 100 basis points over the course of the quarter, the persistently strong economic outlook led to a dis-inversion of the yield curve. However, the market expectation for additional reductions in the Fed Funds rate continued to decline over the course of the fourth quarter and into 2025.

    “Orchid Island Capital (“Orchid”) reported fourth quarter 2024 net income of $5.6 million, and its shareholders equity increased slightly, from $656.0 million to $668.5 million. As a result, Bimini’s advisory service revenues also increased slightly, to $3.4 million compared to $3.3 million for the third quarter of 2024. Further, in late February, Orchid reported yet another increase in its shareholder base, which should lead to another increase in advisory service revenue for the first quarter of 2025.

    “The investment portfolio generated net interest income of $0.3 million. Dividends on Orchid stock were $0.2 million. Mark to market gains and losses on our MBS portfolio, hedge positions and shares of Orchid netted to income of $0.1 million. The MBS portfolio increased by $4.0 million during the fourth quarter of 2024 and increased by $29.5 million for the year. The Company had positive cash flows from operations for the fourth quarter and full year, which has allowed the Company to grow the MBS portfolio throughout the year.

    “The Company – inclusive of both the advisory services segment and the investment portfolio segment, recorded net income before taxes for the quarter of $0.6 million versus a net loss before taxes of $0.8 million for the third quarter of 2024. We updated our projected utilization of our deferred tax assets and increased the valuation allowance, resulting in a tax provision of $2.1 million and a net loss for the 2024 fourth quarter of $1.5 million.

    “Looking forward, while economic activity has remained resilient if not strong, the labor market is quite healthy, and inflation remains above the Fed’s 2% target, uncertainty in the economic outlook has crept into the market as the first quarter of 2025 progresses. What this means for interest rate levels, Federal Reserve monetary policy or the MBS market remains to be seen. However, quarter to date market conditions have been favorable for both Orchid Island and Royal Palm’s investment portfolios.”

    Details of Fourth Quarter 2024 Results of Operations

    The Company reported a net loss of $1.5 million for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024. Advisory service revenue for the quarter was $3.4 million, consisting of management fees of $2.5 million, overhead reimbursements of $0.7 million, and $0.2 million repurchase agreement and clearing services revenue. We recorded interest and dividend income of $1.9 million, and interest expense on repurchase agreements of $1.4 million and long-term debt of $0.6 million. Other income of $0.1 million consisted of a $0.3 million mark to market loss on our shares of Orchid common stock, unrealized losses of $2.7 million on our MBS portfolio, and $3.0 million of unrealized gains on our derivatives used for hedging purposes. The results for the quarter also included operating expenses of $2.8 million and an income tax provision of $2.1 million.

    For the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, the Company reported a net loss of $1.3 million net of an income tax provision of $3.1 million. Advisory service revenue for the year was $12.8 million, comprised of $9.5 million of management fees, $2.6 million of overhead reimbursements and $0.7 million of repurchase agreement and clearing service revenue. The investment portfolio segment generated $5.8 million of interest income and $0.8 million of dividends from our investment in shares of Orchid. The $6.6 million of investment portfolio income was offset by $5.1 million of repurchase agreement interest expense, and $14.3 million of net revenues from advisory services and the investment portfolio were offset by $2.4 million of interest on long-term debt. The Company reported $1.2 million of other income, comprised of $0.3 million of unrealized losses on MBS assets, $0.6 million of realized losses on sales of MBS, $0.4 million of unrealized losses on our shares of Orchid, and $2.4 million of unrealized gains on our derivative positions used for hedging purposes. Operating expenses were $11.3 million for the year, resulting in net income before taxes of $1.8 million.

    Orchid Island Capital, Inc.

    Orchid is managed and advised by Bimini’s subsidiary, Bimini Advisors, LLC (“Bimini Advisors”). As manager, Bimini Advisors is responsible for administering Orchid’s business activities and day-to-day operations. Pursuant to the terms of the management agreement with Orchid, Bimini Advisors provides Orchid with its management team, including its officers, along with appropriate support personnel.

    Bimini also maintains a common stock investment in Orchid which is accounted for under the fair value option, with changes in fair value recorded in the statement of operations for the current period. For the three months ended December 31, 2024, Bimini’s statement of operations included a $0.3 million mark to market loss and dividends of $0.2 million from its investment in Orchid’s common stock. Also during the three months ended December 31, 2024, Bimini recorded $3.4 million in advisory services revenue for managing Orchid’s portfolio, consisting of $2.5 million of management fees, $0.7 million in overhead reimbursement and $0.2 million in repurchase, clearing and administrative fees.

    Book Value Per Share

    The Company’s Book Value Per Share at December 31, 2024 was $0.68. The Company computes Book Value Per Share by dividing total stockholders’ equity by the total number of shares outstanding of the Company’s Class A Common Stock. At December 31, 2024, the Company’s stockholders’ equity was $6.8 million, with 10,005,457 Class A Common shares outstanding.

    Capital Allocation and Return on Invested Capital

    The Company allocates capital between two MBS sub-portfolios, the pass-through MBS portfolio (“PT MBS”) and the structured MBS portfolio, currently consisting of interest-only and inverse interest-only securities. The table below details the changes to the respective sub-portfolios during the quarter.

    Portfolio Activity for the Quarter  
                Structured Security Portfolio          
        Pass-Through     Interest-Only     Inverse Interest                  
        Portfolio     Securities     Only Securities     Sub-total     Total  
    Market Value – September 30, 2024   $ 116,049,271     $ 2,370,934     $ 8,445     $ 2,379,379     $ 118,428,650  
    Securities purchased     9,899,285       –       –       –       9,899,285  
    Return of investment     n/a       (84,596 )     (618 )     (85,214 )     (85,214 )
    Pay-downs     (3,229,672 )     n/a       n/a       n/a       (3,229,672 )
    Premium amortized due to pay-downs     (66,766 )     n/a       n/a       n/a       (66,766 )
    Mark to market losses     (2,596,402 )     (733 )     (978 )     (1,711 )     (2,598,113 )
    Market Value – December 31, 2024   $ 120,055,716     $ 2,285,605     $ 6,849     $ 2,292,454     $ 122,348,170  

    The tables below present the allocation of capital between the respective portfolios at December 31, 2024 and September 30, 2024, and the return on invested capital for each sub-portfolio for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024. Capital allocation is defined as the sum of the market value of securities held, less associated repurchase agreement borrowings, plus cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash associated with repurchase agreements. Capital allocated to non-portfolio assets is not included in the calculation.

    The returns on invested capital in the PT MBS and structured MBS portfolios were approximately 6.7% and 1.4%, respectively, for the fourth quarter of 2024. The combined portfolio generated a return on invested capital of approximately 5.6%.

    Capital Allocation  
                Structured Security Portfolio          
        Pass-Through     Interest-Only     Inverse Interest                  
        Portfolio     Securities     Only Securities     Sub-total     Total  
    December 31, 2024                                        
    Market value   $ 120,055,716     $ 2,285,605     $ 6,849     $ 2,292,454     $ 122,348,170  
    Cash equivalents and restricted cash     7,422,746       –       –       –       7,422,746  
    Repurchase agreement obligations     (117,180,999 )     –       –       –       (117,180,999 )
    Total(1)   $ 10,297,463     $ 2,285,605     $ 6,849     $ 2,292,454     $ 12,589,917  
    % of Total     81.8 %     18.1 %     0.1 %     18.2 %     100.0 %
    September 30, 2024                                        
    Market value   $ 116,049,271     $ 2,370,934     $ 8,445     $ 2,379,379     $ 118,428,650  
    Cash equivalents and restricted cash     5,706,502       –       –       –       5,706,502  
    Repurchase agreement obligations     (113,022,999 )     –       –       –       (113,022,999 )
    Total(1)   $ 8,732,774     $ 2,370,934     $ 8,445     $ 2,379,379     $ 11,112,153  
    % of Total     78.6 %     21.3 %     0.1 %     21.4 %     100.0 %
    (1 ) Invested capital includes the value of the MBS portfolio and cash equivalents and restricted cash, reduced by repurchase agreement borrowings.
    Returns for the Quarter Ended December 31, 2024  
                Structured Security Portfolio          
        Pass-Through     Interest-Only     Inverse Interest                  
        Portfolio     Securities     Only Securities     Sub-total     Total  
    Interest income (expense) (net of repo cost)   $ 234,448     $ 36,465     $ (361 )   $ 36,104     $ 270,552  
    Realized and unrealized losses     (2,663,167 )     (733 )     (978 )     (1,711 )     (2,664,878 )
    Hedge gains     3,014,874       n/a       n/a       n/a       3,014,874  
    Total Return   $ 586,155     $ 35,732     $ (1,339 )   $ 34,393     $ 620,548  
    Beginning capital allocation   $ 8,732,774     $ 2,370,934     $ 8,445     $ 2,379,379     $ 11,112,153  
    Return on invested capital for the quarter(1)     6.7 %     1.5 %     (15.9 )%     1.4 %     5.6 %
    (1 ) Calculated by dividing the Total Return by the Beginning Capital Allocation, expressed as a percentage.


    Prepayments

    For the fourth quarter of 2024, the Company received approximately $3.3 million in scheduled and unscheduled principal repayments and prepayments, which equated to a 3-month constant prepayment rate (“CPR”) of approximately 11.1% for the fourth quarter of 2024. Prepayment rates on the two MBS sub-portfolios were as follows (in CPR):

        PT     Structured          
        MBS Sub-     MBS Sub-     Total  
    Three Months Ended   Portfolio     Portfolio     Portfolio  
    December 31, 2024     10.9       12.5       11.1  
    September 30, 2024     6.3       6.7       6.3  
    June 30, 2024     10.9       5.5       10.0  
    March 31, 2024     18.0       9.2       16.5  
    December 31, 2023     8.9       4.6       8.0  
    September 30, 2023     4.3       6.6       4.8  
    June 30, 2023     8.0       13.0       9.6  
    March 31, 2023     2.4       10.3       5.0  


    Portfolio

    The following tables summarize the MBS portfolio as of December 31, 2024 and 2023:

    ($ in thousands)                            
                            Weighted    
                Percentage           Average    
                of     Weighted     Maturity    
        Fair     Entire     Average     in   Longest
    Asset Category   Value     Portfolio     Coupon     Months   Maturity
    December 31, 2024                            
    Fixed Rate MBS   $ 120,056     98.1 %   5.60 %   341   1-Jan-55
    Structured MBS     2,292     1.9 %   2.85 %   281   15-May-51
    Total MBS Portfolio   $ 122,348     100.0 %   5.26 %   340   1-Jan-55
    December 31, 2023                            
    Fixed Rate MBS   $ 90,181     97.3 %   6.00 %   343   1-Nov-53
    Structured MBS     2,550     2.7 %   2.84 %   290   15-May-51
    Total MBS Portfolio   $ 92,731     100.0 %   5.44 %   341   1-Nov-53
    ($ in thousands)                            
        December 31, 2024     December 31, 2023  
                Percentage of             Percentage of  
    Agency   Fair Value     Entire Portfolio     Fair Value     Entire Portfolio  
    Fannie Mae   $ 32,692     26.7 %   $ 38,204     41.2 %
    Freddie Mac     89,656     73.3 %     54,527     58.8 %
    Total Portfolio   $ 122,348     100.0 %   $ 92,731     100.0 %
        December 31, 2024     December 31, 2023  
    Weighted Average Pass Through Purchase Price   $ 102.72     $ 104.43  
    Weighted Average Structured Purchase Price   $ 4.48     $ 4.48  
    Weighted Average Pass Through Current Price   $ 99.63     $ 101.55  
    Weighted Average Structured Current Price   $ 13.71     $ 13.46  
    Effective Duration (1)     3.622       2.508  
    (1 ) Effective duration is the approximate percentage change in price for a 100 basis point change in rates. An effective duration of 3.622 indicates that an interest rate increase of 1.0% would be expected to cause a 3.622% decrease in the value of the MBS in the Company’s investment portfolio at December 31, 2024. An effective duration of 2.508 indicates that an interest rate increase of 1.0% would be expected to cause a 2.508% decrease in the value of the MBS in the Company’s investment portfolio at December 31, 2023. These figures include the structured securities in the portfolio but not the effect of the Company’s hedges. Effective duration quotes for individual investments are obtained from The Yield Book, Inc.


    Financing and Liquidity

    As of December 31, 2024, the Company had outstanding repurchase obligations of approximately $117.2 million, with a net weighted average borrowing rate of 4.68%. These agreements were collateralized by MBS with a fair value, including accrued interest, of approximately $122.7 million. At December 31, 2024, the Company’s liquidity was approximately $5.9 million, consisting of unpledged MBS and cash and cash equivalents.

    We may pledge more of our structured MBS as part of a repurchase agreement funding, but retain cash in lieu of acquiring additional assets. In this way, we can, at a modest cost, retain higher levels of cash on hand and decrease the likelihood that we will have to sell assets in a distressed market in order to raise cash. Below is a list of outstanding borrowings under repurchase obligations at December 31, 2024.

    ($ in thousands)                                  
    Repurchase Agreement Obligations  
                      Weighted             Weighted  
        Total           Average             Average  
        Outstanding     % of     Borrowing     Amount     Maturity  
    Counterparty   Balances     Total     Rate     at Risk(1)     (in Days)  
    South Street Securities, LLC   $ 26,234     22.4 %   4.79 %     1,226     23  
    Marex Capital Markets Inc.     24,368     20.8 %   4.66 %     1,205     18  
    DV Securities, LLC.     19,254     16.4 %   4.63 %     834     28  
    Mirae Asset Securities (USA) Inc.     19,111     16.3 %   4.76 %     842     139  
    Clear Street LLC     16,855     14.4 %   4.54 %     794     79  
    Mitsubishi UFJ Securities, Inc.     11,359     9.7 %   4.68 %     858     14  
        $ 117,181     100.0 %   4.68 %   $ 5,759     49  
    (1 ) Equal to the fair value of securities sold (including accrued interest receivable) and cash posted as collateral, if any, minus the sum of repurchase agreement liabilities, accrued interest payable and securities posted by the counterparty (if any).


    Summarized Consolidated Financial Statements

    The following is a summarized presentation of the unaudited consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, and the unaudited consolidated statements of operations for the calendar quarters and years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023. Amounts presented are subject to change.

    BIMINI CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (Unaudited – Amounts Subject to Change)
     
        December 31, 2024     December 31, 2023  
    ASSETS                
    Mortgage-backed securities, at fair value   $ 122,348,170     $ 92,730,852  
    Cash equivalents and restricted cash     7,422,746       4,470,286  
    Orchid Island Capital, Inc. common stock, at fair value     4,427,372       4,797,269  
    Accrued interest receivable     601,640       488,660  
    Deferred tax assets, net     15,930,953       19,047,680  
    Other assets     4,122,776       4,063,267  
    Total Assets   $ 154,853,657     $ 125,598,014  
                     
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY                
    Repurchase agreements   $ 117,180,999     $ 86,906,999  
    Long-term debt     27,368,158       27,394,417  
    Other liabilities     3,483,093       3,168,857  
    Total Liabilities     148,032,250       117,470,273  
    Stockholders’ equity     6,821,407       8,127,741  
    Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity   $ 154,853,657     $ 125,598,014  
    Class A Common Shares outstanding     10,005,457       10,005,457  
    Book value per share   $ 0.68     $ 0.81  
    BIMINI CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (Unaudited – Amounts Subject to Change)
     
        Years Ended December 31,     Three Months Ended December 31,  
        2024     2023     2024     2023  
    Advisory services   $ 12,784,468     $ 13,594,907     $ 3,387,640     $ 3,076,045  
    Interest and dividend income     6,658,226       4,335,843       1,876,818       1,554,080  
    Interest expense     (7,541,267 )     (5,418,955 )     (1,982,610 )     (1,794,094 )
    Net revenues     11,901,427       12,511,795       3,281,848       2,836,031  
    Other income (expense)     1,167,019       (1,866,834 )     99,565       599,961  
    Expenses     11,258,053       10,497,603       2,818,739       3,840,310  
    Net income (loss) before income tax provision     1,810,393       147,358       562,674       (404,318 )
    Income tax provision     3,116,727       4,130,563       2,064,496       4,451,159  
    Net loss   $ (1,306,334 )   $ (3,983,205 )   $ (1,501,822 )   $ (4,855,477 )
                                     
    Basic and Diluted Net Loss Per Share of:                                
    CLASS A COMMON STOCK   $ (0.13 )   $ (0.40 )   $ (0.15 )   $ (0.48 )
    CLASS B COMMON STOCK   $ (0.13 )   $ (0.40 )   $ (0.15 )   $ (0.48 )
        Three Months Ended December 31,  
    Key Balance Sheet Metrics   2024     2023  
    Average MBS(1)   $ 120,388,407     $ 88,796,005  
    Average repurchase agreements(1)     115,101,999       84,161,999  
    Average stockholders’ equity(1)     7,572,318       10,555,480  
                     
    Key Performance Metrics                
    Average yield on MBS(2)     5.56 %     6.08 %
    Average cost of funds(2)     4.87 %     5.60 %
    Average economic cost of funds(3)     4.87 %     5.70 %
    Average interest rate spread(4)     0.69 %     0.48 %
    Average economic interest rate spread(5)     0.69 %     0.38 %
    (1 ) Average MBS, repurchase agreements and stockholders’ equity balances are calculated using two data points, the beginning and ending balances.
    (2 ) Portfolio yields and costs of funds are calculated based on the average balances of the underlying investment portfolio/repurchase agreement balances and are annualized for the quarterly periods presented.
    (3 ) Represents interest cost of our borrowings and the effect of derivative agreements attributed to the period related to hedging activities, divided by average repurchase agreements.
    (4 ) Average interest rate spread is calculated by subtracting average cost of funds from average yield on MBS.
    (5 ) Average economic interest rate spread is calculated by subtracting average economic cost of funds from average yield on MBS.


    About Bimini Capital Management, Inc.

    Bimini Capital Management, Inc. invests primarily in, but is not limited to investing in, residential mortgage-related securities issued by the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae). Its objective is to earn returns on the spread between the yield on its assets and its costs, including the interest expense on the funds it borrows. In addition, Bimini generates a significant portion of its revenue serving as the manager of the MBS portfolio of, and providing certain repurchase agreement trading, clearing and administrative services to, Orchid Island Capital, Inc.

    Forward Looking Statements

    Statements herein relating to matters that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The reader is cautioned that such forward-looking statements are based on information available at the time and on management’s good faith belief with respect to future events, and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual performance or results to differ materially from those expressed in such forward-looking statements. Important factors that could cause such differences are described in Bimini Capital Management, Inc.’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including Bimini Capital Management, Inc.’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. Bimini Capital Management, Inc. assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent results, changes in assumptions or changes in other factors affecting forward-looking statements, except as may be required by law.

    Earnings Conference Call Details

    An earnings conference call and live audio webcast will be hosted Friday, March 7, 2025, at 10:00 AM ET. Participants can register and receive dial-in information at https://register.vevent.com/register/BI5a76ee1f6a7e42b0a82786c7f6e48550. A live audio webcast of the conference call can be accessed at https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/98jgiw2o or via the investor relations section of the Company’s website at https://ir.biminicapital.com.

    CONTACT:
    Bimini Capital Management, Inc.
    Robert E. Cauley, 772-231-1400
    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
    https://ir.biminicapital.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: IDT Corporation Reports Record Second Quarter 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Record levels of gross profit +16%; income from operations +77%; Adjusted EBITDA*+56%

    GAAP EPS increased to $0.80 from $0.57; Non-GAAP EPS*increased to $0.84 from $0.67

    IDT raised its quarterly dividend 20% to 6 cents

    NEWARK, NJ, March 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — IDT Corporation (NYSE: IDT), a global provider of fintech, cloud communications, and traditional communications solutions, today reported results for its second quarter fiscal year 2025, the three months ended January 31, 2025.

    SECOND QUARTER HIGHLIGHTS

    (Throughout this release, unless otherwise noted, results for the second quarter of fiscal year 2025 (2Q25) are compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2024 (2Q24). All earnings per share (EPS) and other ‘per share’ results are per diluted share.

    • Key Businesses / Segments
      • NRS
        • Recurring revenue**: +32% to $31.6 million;
        • Income from operations: +71% to $9.1 million;
        • Adjusted EBITDA: +65% to $10.1 million;
        • ‘Rule of 40’ score**: 55
      • BOSS Money / Fintech segment
        • BOSS Money transactions: +36% to 5.7 million;
        • BOSS Money revenue: +34% to $33.5 million;
        • Fintech segment gross profit: +35% to $21.7 million;
        • Fintech segment income from operations: increased to $3.1 million from a loss of $(0.7) million;
        • Fintech segment Adjusted EBITDA: increased to $3.9 million from a loss of $(12) thousand;
      • net2phone
        • Subscription revenue**: +9% to $21.0 million (+14% on a constant currency basis);
        • Income from operations: increased to $1.1 million from $0.4 million;
        • Adjusted EBITDA: +55% to $2.9 million;
      • Traditional Communications
        • Gross profit: +2% to $43.1 million;
        • Income from operations: +24% to $18.1 million;
        • Adjusted EBITDA: +19% to $20.2 million;
    • IDT Consolidated
      • Revenue: +2% to $303.3 million;
      • Gross profit (GP) / margin: GP +16% to $112 million; GP margin +420 bps to 37.0%;
      • Income from operations: +77% to $28.3 million;
      • Net income attributable to IDT: +41% to $20.3 million;
      • GAAP EPS: Increased to $0.80 from $0.57;
      • Non-GAAP net income: +26% to $21.3 million;
      • Non-GAAP EPS: Increased to $0.84 from $0.67;
      • Adjusted EBITDA: +56% to $34.0 million;
      • CapEx: +6% to $4.8 million;
      • Stock buyback: Repurchased 179,338 shares of IDT Class B common stock in market transactions during 2Q25 for $8.5 million at an average share price of $47.59;
      • Common stock dividend: IDT increased its quarterly dividend from $0.05 to $0.06.

    REMARKS BY SHMUEL JONAS, CEO

    “IDT had a strong second quarter led by NRS and BOSS Money, and supported by robust results from our Traditional Communications segment, which increased its cash generation for the third consecutive quarter. On a consolidated basis, we again generated record levels of gross profit, income from operations, and Adjusted EBITDA.

    “NRS continued to deepen its penetration of the independent retailer market. We are now launching new features and functionalities that increase the value of our solution for retailers and will help us to drive additional growth.

    “BOSS Money delivered another quarter of strong year-over-year transaction and revenue growth. In the second quarter, we continued to focus on improving the margin contribution, particularly in our retail channel, and that effort helped to boost our Fintech segment’s gross profit and Adjusted EBITDA less CapEx to record levels.

    “net2phone continued its expansion led by further growth in the U.S. market. We are especially excited about last week’s launch of net2phone’s virtual AI agent. It has been very well received by our internal BOSS and NRS teams that are using it with great success to enhance the quality and consistency of customer interactions while reducing costs. We are confident that net2phone clients will find that it provides them with great value right out of the gate. Moreover, as they build with our AI agent, it will provide clients with increasingly sophisticated, tailored solutions that add value across disparate functions within their organizations.

    “Our Traditional Communications segment increased Adjusted EBITDA for the third sequential quarter and surpassed $20 million for the first time since fiscal 2022.

    “In light of our solid financial position and positive outlook, and mindful of the feedback we’ve received from our investors, we stepped up our repurchases of stock during the second quarter and have increased our regular quarterly dividend by 20%.”

    2Q25 RESULTS BY SEGMENT

    (For all periods presented, capital expenditures (CapEx), previously provided on a consolidated basis, is now also provided for each business segment.)

    National Retail Solutions (NRS)

    National Retail Solutions (NRS)
    (Terminals and accounts at end of period. $ in millions, except for average revenue per terminal)
          2Q25       1Q25       2Q24       2Q25-2Q24 (% Δ)  
    Terminals and payment processing accounts                                
    Active POS terminals     34,800       33,100       28,700       +21 %
    Payment processing accounts     23,900       22,700       18,200       +32 %
                                     
    Recurring revenue                                
     Merchant Services & Other   $ 18.1     $ 17.2     $ 12.5       +45 %
     Advertising & Data   $ 10.0     $ 8.5     $ 8.7       +15 %
     SaaS Fees   $ 3.5     $ 3.3     $ 2.7       +30 %
    Total recurring revenue   $ 31.6     $ 28.9     $ 23.9       +32 %
     POS terminal sales   $ 1.3     $ 1.4     $ 1.3       +2 %
    Total revenue   $ 33.0     $ 30.4     $ 25.2       +31 %
                                     
    Monthly average recurring revenue per terminal**   $ 310     $ 295     $ 285       +9 %
                                     
    Gross profit   $ 30.3     $ 27.6     $ 22.5       +35 %
    Gross profit margin     91.8 %     91.0 %     89.1 %     +270 bps
    Technology & development   $ 2.2     $ 2.0     $ 1.9       +14 %
    SG&A   $ 19.0     $ 19.0     $ 15.2       +25 %
    Income from operations   $ 9.1     $ 6.6     $ 5.3       +71 %
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 10.1     $ 7.6     $ 6.1       +65 %
    CapEx   $ 0.9     $ 1.2     $ 1.0       (4 )%
                                     

    NRS Take-Aways / Updates:

    • NRS added approximately 1,700 net active terminals and approximately 1,200 net payment processing accounts during 2Q25. Net active terminal additions included the impact of approximately 300 terminals operating in seasonal stores that suspended operations following the quarter close.
    • The 45% year-over-year increase in Merchant Services & Other revenue was driven by the growth in payment processing accounts, and higher merchant services revenue per account, driven in part by the increased percentage of retail transactions paid with a credit or debit card.
    • The 30% year-over-year increase in SaaS Fees revenue reflects the growth of net active terminals and migration of retailers to premium SaaS plans.

    Fintech

    Fintech
    (Transactions in millions. $ in millions, except for average revenue per transaction)
          2Q25       1Q25       2Q24       2Q25-2Q24 (% Δ, $)  
    BOSS Money transactions     5.7       5.6       4.2       +36 %
                                     
    Fintech Revenue                                
    BOSS Money   $ 33.5     $ 33.7     $ 25.0       +34 %
    Other   $ 3.3     $ 3.4     $ 2.9       +13 %
    Total Revenue   $ 36.8     $ 37.1     $ 28.0       +32 %
                                     
    Average revenue per BOSS Money transaction**   $ 5.87     $ 6.01     $ 5.98     $ (0.11 )
                                     
    Gross profit   $ 21.7     $ 21.6     $ 16.1       +35 %
    Gross profit margin     58.9 %     58.2 %     57.5 %     140 bps
    Technology & development   $ 2.3     $ 2.3     $ 2.5       (8 )%
    SG&A   $ 16.3     $ 16.1     $ 14.3       +14 %
    Income (loss) from operations   $ 3.1     $ 3.2     $ (0.7 )     +$3.8  
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 3.9     $ 4.0     $ 0       +$3.9  
    CapEx   $ 0.8     $ 1.1     $ 0.8       +1 %
                                     

    Fintech Take-Aways:

    • The 36% increase in BOSS Money transactions reflected a 40% year-over-year increase in digital transactions and a 22% increase in retail transactions.
    • BOSS Money revenue increased 34% year-over-year driven by a 38% year-over-year increase in digital channel revenue. The 1% sequential decrease in revenue reflected BOSS Money’s continued focus on expanding per-transaction margins, particularly at retail, which boosted gross profit while dampening transaction volume growth and revenue.
    • The strong increases in the Fintech segment’s income from operations and Adjusted EBITDA were driven by BOSS Money revenue growth, higher margins on BOSS Money transactions and improved operating leverage as the business continues to scale.
    • BOSS Money continued to expand to new destinations during 2Q25 (Venezuela and Eritrea) with Brazil expected to come online in 3Q25. BOSS Money also launched debit card payment capabilities at BOSS Money retailers across the U.S. and continued to build out its already extensive payout network in key destination markets.

    net2phone

    net2phone
    (Seats in thousands at end of period. $ in millions)
          2Q25       1Q25       2Q24       2Q25-2Q24 (% Δ, $)  
    Seats**     410       406       375       +9 %
                                     
    Revenue                                
    Subscription revenue   $ 21.0     $ 21.0     $ 19.3       +9 %
    Other revenue   $ 0.5     $ 0.6     $ 1.0       (54 )%
    Total Revenue   $ 21.5     $ 21.6     $ 20.4       +6 %
                                     
    Gross profit   $ 17.0     $ 17.1     $ 16.1       +6 %
    Gross profit margin     79.2 %     79.0 %     78.9 %     20 bps
    Technology & development   $ 2.8     $ 3.0     $ 2.6       +5 %
    SG&A   $ 13.0     $ 13.1     $ 13.1       (1 )%
    Income from operations   $ 1.1     $ 1.0     $ 0.4       +201 %
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 2.9     $ 2.5     $ 1.8       +55 %
    CapEx   $ 1.8     $ 1.6     $ 1.4       +28 %
     

    net2phone Take-Aways:

    • The 9% year over year increase in total seats served was powered by continued expansion in key markets led by the U.S., Brazil, and Mexico. CCaaS seats served increased by 10% year-over year.
    • Subscription revenue increased by 9% year-over-year. The increase reflected net seat growth and increased subscription revenue per seat** in the U.S., offset by the negative FX impact of a strengthened U.S. dollar versus local currencies in net2phone’s key Latin American markets. On a constant currency basis, subscription revenue increased by 14% year over year.
    • Operating margin** increased to 5% from 2% in 2Q24, and Adjusted EBITDA margin** increased to 13% from 9% in 2Q24. Additional steady margin improvement remains a key strategic focus.
    • Following the quarter close, net2phone launched its AI agent, a scalable virtual assistant providing exceptional customer experiences across sales, support, and administrative tasks.

    Traditional Communications

    Traditional Communications
    ($ in millions)
          2Q25       1Q25       2Q24       2Q25-2Q24 (% Δ)  
    Revenue                                
    IDT Digital Payments   $ 101.6     $ 105.1     $ 99.7       +2 %
    BOSS Revolution   $ 53.3     $ 56.8     $ 66.7       (20 )%
    IDT Global   $ 51.3     $ 52.4     $ 48.7       +5 %
    Other   $ 5.9     $ 6.2     $ 7.5       (22 )%
    Total Revenue   $ 212.0     $ 220.5     $ 222.5       (5 )%
                                     
    Gross profit   $ 43.1     $ 41.3     $ 42.3       +2 %
    Gross profit margin     20.3 %     18.8 %     19.0 %     +130 bps
    Technology & development   $ 5.4     $ 5.5     $ 5.9       (9 )%
    SG&A   $ 19.4     $ 20.0     $ 21.4       (9 )%
    Income from operations   $ 18.1     $ 15.7     $ 14.6       +24 %
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 20.2     $ 17.8     $ 17.0       +19 %
    CapEx   $ 1.2     $ 1.4     $ 1.4       (8 )%
                                     

    Take-Aways: 

    • IDT Global continues to mitigate the impacts of the ongoing industry-wide declines in paid-minute voice through a traffic mix shift to higher margin routes, new service offerings, and operational efficiencies.
    • For the third consecutive quarter, Traditional Communications’ income from operations and Adjusted EBITDA both increased sequentially. In 2Q25, the increases were driven by increasing gross profit contributions from each of the three major lines of business, as well as by continued efforts to streamline operations and remove costs.

    OTHER FINANCIAL RESULTS

    Consolidated results for all periods presented include corporate overhead. In 2Q25, Corporate G&A expense decreased to $3.0 million from $3.2 million in 2Q24.

    As of January 31, 2025, IDT held $171.1 million in cash, cash equivalents, debt securities, and current equity investments. Also at January 31, 2025, current assets totaled $462.1 million and current liabilities totaled $278.2 million. The Company had no outstanding debt at the quarter end.

    Net cash provided by operating activities decreased to $20.2 million in 2Q25 from $28.4 million in 2Q24. Exclusive of changes in customer funds deposits at IDT’s Fintech segment, net cash provided by operating activities decreased to $7.3 million in 2Q25 from $25.4 million in 2Q24. This decrease predominantly reflects the timing of payments made by IDT to cover anticipated BOSS Money disbursement prefunding.

    Capital expenditures increased to $4.8 million in 2Q25 from $4.6 million in 2Q24.

    IDT EARNINGS ANNOUNCEMENT INFORMATION

    This release is available for download in the “Investors & Media” section of the IDT Corporation website (https://www.idt.net/investors-and-media) and has been filed on a current report (Form 8-K) with the SEC.

    IDT will host an earnings conference call beginning at 5:30 PM Eastern today with management’s discussion of results followed by Q&A with investors. To listen to the call and participate in the Q&A, dial 1-888-506-0062 (toll-free from the US) or 1-973-528-0011 (international) and provide the following access code: 145736.

    A replay of the conference call will be available approximately three hours after the call concludes through March 20, 2025. To access the call replay, dial 1-877-481-4010 (toll-free from the US) or 1-919-882-2331 (international) and provide this replay passcode: 51975. The replay will also be accessible via streaming audio at the IDT investor relations website.

    NOTES

    *Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS are Non-GAAP financial measures intended to provide useful information that supplements IDT’s or the relevant segment’s results in accordance with GAAP. Please refer to the Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures later in this release for an explanation of these terms and their respective reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.

    **See ‘Explanation of Key Performance Metrics’ at the end of this release.

    ABOUT IDT CORPORATION

    IDT Corporation (NYSE: IDT) is a global provider of fintech and communications solutions through a portfolio of synergistic businesses: National Retail Solutions (NRS), through its point-of-sale (POS) platform, enables independent retailers to operate more effectively while providing advertisers and marketers with unprecedented reach into underserved consumer markets; BOSS Money facilitates innovative international remittances and fintech payments solutions; net2phone provides enterprises and organizations with intelligently integrated cloud communications and contact center services across channels and devices; IDT Digital Payments and the BOSS Revolution calling service make sharing prepaid products and services and speaking with friends and family around the world convenient and reliable; and, IDT Global and IDT Express enable communications services to provision and manage international voice and SMS messaging.

    All statements above that are not purely about historical facts, including, but not limited to, those in which we use the words “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “plan,” “intend,” “estimate,” “target” and similar expressions, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. While these forward-looking statements represent our current judgment of what may happen in the future, actual results may differ materially from the results expressed or implied by these statements due to numerous important factors. Our filings with the SEC provide detailed information on such statements and risks and should be consulted along with this release. To the extent permitted under applicable law, IDT assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

    CONTACT

    IDT Corporation Investor Relations
    Bill Ulrey
    william.ulrey@idt.net
    973-438-3838

    IDT CORPORATION
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

        January 31,
    2025    		     July 31,
    2024    		  
        (Unaudited)        
        (in thousands, except per share data)  
    Assets            
    Current assets:                
    Cash and cash equivalents   $ 142,152     $ 164,557  
    Restricted cash and cash equivalents     105,554       90,899  
    Debt securities     23,852       23,438  
    Equity investments     5,091       5,009  
    Trade accounts receivable, net of allowance for credit losses of $7,295 at January 31, 2025 and $6,352 at July 31, 2024     45,127       42,215  
    Settlement assets, net of reserve of $1,804 at January 31, 2025 and $1,866 at July 31, 2024     41,779       22,186  
    Disbursement prefunding     57,676       30,736  
    Prepaid expenses     15,989       17,558  
    Other current assets     24,914       25,927  
    Total current assets     462,134       422,525  
    Property, plant, and equipment, net     38,380       38,652  
    Goodwill     26,149       26,288  
    Other intangibles, net     5,583       6,285  
    Equity investments     6,748       6,518  
    Operating lease right-of-use assets     2,498       3,273  
    Deferred income tax assets, net     22,333       35,008  
    Other assets     11,903       11,546  
    Total assets   $ 575,728     $ 550,095  
    Liabilities, redeemable noncontrolling interest, and equity                
    Current liabilities:                
    Trade accounts payable   $ 22,482     $ 24,773  
    Accrued expenses     89,472       103,176  
    Deferred revenue     28,384       30,364  
    Customer funds deposits     104,720       91,893  
    Settlement liabilities     16,975       12,764  
    Other current liabilities     16,157       16,374  
    Total current liabilities     278,190       279,344  
    Operating lease liabilities     1,349       1,533  
    Other liabilities     1,093       2,662  
                     
    Total liabilities     280,632       283,539  
    Commitments and contingencies                
    Redeemable noncontrolling interest     11,228       10,901  
    Equity:                
    IDT Corporation stockholders’ equity:                
    Preferred stock, $.01 par value; authorized shares—10,000; no shares issued     —       —  
    Class A common stock, $.01 par value; authorized shares—35,000; 3,272 shares issued and 1,574 shares outstanding at January 31, 2025 and July 31, 2024     33       33  
    Class B common stock, $.01 par value; authorized shares—200,000; 28,233 and 28,177 shares issued and 23,491 and 23,684 shares outstanding at January 31, 2025 and July 31, 2024, respectively     282       282  
    Additional paid-in capital     306,781       303,510  
    Treasury stock, at cost, consisting of 1,698 and 1,698 shares of Class A common stock and 4,742 and 4,493 shares of Class B common stock at January 31, 2025 and July 31, 2024, respectively     (137,475 )     (126,080 )
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (19,599 )     (18,142 )
    Retained earnings     121,573       86,580  
    Total IDT Corporation stockholders’ equity     271,595       246,183  
    Noncontrolling interests     12,273       9,472  
    Total equity     283,868       255,655  
    Total liabilities, redeemable noncontrolling interest, and equity   $ 575,728     $ 550,095  

    IDT CORPORATION
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
    (Unaudited)

        Three Months Ended
    January 31,    		     Six Months Ended
    January 31,    		  
        2025     2024     2025     2024  
        (in thousands, except per share data)  
           
    Revenues   $ 303,349     $ 296,098     $ 612,915     $ 597,302  
    Direct cost of revenues     191,239       199,171       393,178       406,382  
    Gross profit     112,110       96,927       219,737       190,920  
    Operating expenses (gain):                                
    Selling, general and administrative (i)     70,721       67,346       141,772       131,723  
    Technology and development (i)     12,612       12,925       25,372       25,335  
    Severance     233       345       410       869  
    Other operating expense (gain), net     227       294       227       (190 )
    Total operating expenses     83,793       80,910       167,781       157,737  
    Income from operations     28,317       16,017       51,956       33,183  
    Interest income, net     1,354       1,195       2,782       2,039  
    Other income (expense), net     207       2,534       (76 )     (3,053 )
    Income before income taxes     29,878       19,746       54,662       32,169  
    Provision for income taxes     (7,665 )     (3,992 )     (13,967 )     (7,939 )
    Net income     22,213       15,754       40,695       24,230  
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests     (1,944 )     (1,329 )     (3,178 )     (2,146 )
    Net income attributable to IDT Corporation   $ 20,269     $ 14,425     $ 37,517     $ 22,084  
    Earnings per share attributable to IDT Corporation common stockholders:                                
    Basic   $ 0.81     $ 0.57     $ 1.49     $ 0.88  
    Diluted   $ 0.80     $ 0.57     $ 1.48     $ 0.87  
    Weighted-average number of shares used in calculation of earnings per share:                                
    Basic     25,161       25,175       25,182       25,176  
    Diluted     25,324       25,317       25,343       25,297  
    (i) Stock-based compensation included in:                                
    Selling, general and administrative expense   $ 768     $ 2,357     $ 1,602     $ 2,998  
    Technology and development expense   $ 95     $ 130     $ 172     $ 260  


    IDT CORPORATION 
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited)

        Six Months Ended
    January 31,    		  
        2025     2024  
        (in thousands)  
    Operating activities                
    Net income   $ 40,695     $ 24,230  
    Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:                
    Depreciation and amortization     10,490       10,146  
    Deferred income taxes     12,674       5,787  
    Provision for credit losses, doubtful accounts receivable, and reserve for settlement assets     2,472       1,696  
    Stock-based compensation     1,774       3,258  
    Other     1,077       2,829  
    Changes in assets and liabilities:                
    Trade accounts receivable     (4,978 )     (7,040 )
    Settlement assets, disbursement prefunding, prepaid expenses, other current assets, and other assets     (46,244 )     9,966  
    Trade accounts payable, accrued expenses, settlement liabilities, other current liabilities, and other liabilities     (11,844 )     (6,200 )
    Customer funds deposits     15,701       15  
    Deferred revenue     (1,500 )     (1,381 )
    Net cash provided by operating activities     20,317       43,306  
    Investing activities                
    Capital expenditures     (10,100 )     (8,885 )
    Purchase of convertible preferred stock in equity method investment     (673 )     (1,009 )
    Purchases of debt securities and equity investments     (15,997 )     (19,357 )
    Proceeds from maturities and sales of debt securities and redemption of equity investments     16,751       31,231  
    Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities     (10,019 )     1,980  
    Financing activities                
    Dividends paid     (2,524 )     —  
    Distributions to noncontrolling interests     (50 )     (59 )
    Proceeds from borrowings under revolving credit facility     24,534       30,588  
    Repayment of borrowings under revolving credit facility     (24,534 )     (30,588 )
    Purchase of restricted shares of net2phone common stock     —       (3,558 )
    Proceeds from exercise of stock options     —       172  
    Repurchases of Class B common stock     (11,395 )     (3,170 )
    Net cash used in financing activities     (13,969 )     (6,615 )
    Effect of exchange rate changes on cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash and cash equivalents     (4,079 )     (3,182 )
    Net (decrease) increase in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash and cash equivalents     (7,750 )     35,489  
    Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period     255,456       198,823  
    Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash and cash equivalents at end of period   $ 247,706     $ 234,312  
    Supplemental Schedule of Non-Cash Financing Activities                
    Shares of the Company’s Class B common stock issued to an executive officer for bonus payment   $ 1,824     $ —  
    Value of the Company’s Class B common stock exchanged for National Retail Solutions shares   $ —     $ 6,254  


    *    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures for the Second Quarter Fiscal 2025 and 2024

    In addition to disclosing financial results that are determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (GAAP), IDT also disclosed for 2Q25, 1Q25, and 2Q24, Adjusted EBITDA, and for 2Q25 and 2Q24, non-GAAP earnings per diluted share (Non-GAAP EPS). Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS are non-GAAP financial measures intended to provide useful information that supplements IDT’s or the relevant segment’s results in accordance with GAAP. The following explains these terms and their respective reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP measures

    Generally, a non-GAAP measure is a numerical measure of a company’s performance, financial position, or cash flows that either excludes or includes amounts that are not normally excluded or included in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP.

    IDT’s measure of Non-GAAP EPS is calculated by dividing non-GAAP net income by the diluted weighted-average shares. IDT’s measure of non-GAAP net income starts with net income attributable to IDT in accordance with GAAP and adds severance expense, stock-based compensation, and other operating expenses, and deducts other operating gains. These additions and subtractions are non-cash and/or non-routine items in the relevant fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024 periods.

    Management believes that IDT’s Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS are measures which provide useful information to both management and investors by excluding certain expenses and non-routine gains and losses that may not be indicative of IDT’s or the relevant segment’s core operating results. Management uses Adjusted EBITDA, among other measures, as a relevant indicator of core operational strengths in its financial and operational decision making. In addition, management uses Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS to evaluate operating performance in relation to IDT’s competitors. Disclosure of these financial measures may be useful to investors in evaluating performance and allows for greater transparency to the underlying supplemental information used by management in its financial and operational decision-making. In addition, IDT has historically reported similar financial measures and believes such measures are commonly used by readers of financial information in assessing performance, therefore the inclusion of comparative numbers provides consistency in financial reporting.

    Management refers to Adjusted EBITDA, as well as the GAAP measures income (loss) from operations and net income, on a segment and/or consolidated level to facilitate internal and external comparisons to the segments’ and IDT’s historical operating results, in making operating decisions, for budget and planning purposes, and to form the basis upon which management is compensated.

    While depreciation and amortization are considered operating costs under GAAP, these expenses primarily represent the non-cash current period allocation of costs associated with long-lived assets acquired or capitalized in prior periods. IDT’s Adjusted EBITDA, which is exclusive of depreciation and amortization, is a useful indicator of its current performance.

    Severance expense is excluded from the calculation of Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS. Severance expense is reflective of decisions made by management in each period regarding the aspects of IDT’s and its segments’ businesses to be focused on in light of changing market realities and other factors. While there may be similar charges in other periods, the nature and magnitude of these charges can fluctuate markedly and do not reflect the performance of IDT’s core and continuing operations.

    Other operating (expense) gain, net, which is a component of income (loss) from operations, is excluded from the calculation of Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS. Other operating (expense) gain, net includes, among other items, legal fees net of insurance claims related to Straight Path Communications Inc.’s stockholders’ class action and gain from the write-off of a contingent consideration liability. From time-to-time, IDT may have gains or incur costs related to non-routine legal, tax, and other matters, however, these various items generally do not occur each quarter. IDT believes the gain and losses from these non-routine matters are not components of IDT’s or the relevant segment’s core operating results.

    Stock-based compensation recognized by IDT and other companies may not be comparable because of the variety of types of awards as well as the various valuation methodologies and subjective assumptions that are permitted under GAAP. Stock-based compensation is excluded from IDT’s calculation of Non-GAAP EPS because management believes this allows investors to make more meaningful comparisons of the operating results per share of IDT’s core business with the results of other companies. However, stock-based compensation will continue to be a significant expense for IDT for the foreseeable future and an important part of employees’ compensation that impacts their performance.

    Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS should be considered in addition to, not as a substitute for, or superior to, income (loss) from operations, cash flow from operating activities, net income, basic and diluted earnings per share or other measures of liquidity and financial performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. In addition, IDT’s measurements of Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies.

    Following are reconciliations of Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP EPS to the most directly comparable GAAP measure, which are, (a) for Adjusted EBITDA, income (loss) from operations for IDT’s reportable segments and net income for IDT on a consolidated basis, and (b) for Non-GAAP EPS, diluted earnings per share.

    IDT Corporation
    Reconciliation of Net Income to Adjusted EBITDA
    (unaudited) in millions. Figures may not foot or cross-foot due to rounding to millions

        Total IDT Corporation     Traditional Communica-tions     net2phone     NRS     Fintech     Corporate  
    Three Months Ended January 31, 2025
    (2Q25)    		                                                
    Net income attributable to IDT Corporation   $ 20.3                                          
    Adjustments:                                                
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests     1.9                                          
    Net income     22.2                                          
    Provision for income taxes     7.7                                          
    Income before income taxes     29.9                                          
     Interest income, net     (1.4 )                                        
     Other income, net     (0.2 )                                        
    Income (loss) from operations     28.3     $ 18.1     $ 1.1     $ 9.1     $ 3.1     $ (3.1 )
    Depreciation and amortization     5.2       1.9       1.6       1.0       0.8       –  
    Other operating expense, net     0.2       –       0.2       –       –       –  
    Severance     0.2       0.2       –       –       –       –  
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 34.0     $ 20.2     $ 2.9     $ 10.1     $ 3.9     $ (3.1 )


    IDT Corporation
    Reconciliation of Net Income to Adjusted EBITDA
    (unaudited) in millions. Figures may not foot or cross-foot due to rounding to millions

        Total IDT Corporation     Traditional Communica-tions     net2phone     NRS     Fintech     Corporate  
    Three Months Ended October 31, 2024
    (1Q25)    		                                                
    Net income attributable to IDT Corporation   $ 17.2                                          
    Adjustments:                                                
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests     1.2                                          
    Net income     18.5                                          
    Provision for income taxes     6.3                                          
    Income before income taxes     24.8                                          
     Interest income, net     (1.4 )                                        
     Other expense, net     0.3                                          
    Income (loss) from operations     23.6     $ 15.7     $ 1.0     $ 6.6     $ 3.2     $ (2.9 )
    Depreciation and amortization     5.2       2.0       1.6       1.0       0.7       –  
    Severance     0.2       0.2       –       –       –       –  
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 29.1     $ 17.8     $ 2.5     $ 7.6     $ 4.0     $ (2.9 )
        Total IDT Corporation     Traditional Communica-tions     net2phone     NRS     Fintech     Corporate  
    Three Months Ended January 31, 2024
    (2Q24)    		                                                
    Net income attributable to IDT Corporation   $ 14.4                                          
    Adjustments:                                                
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests     1.3                                          
    Net income     15.8                                          
    Provision for income taxes     4.0                                          
    Income before income taxes     19.7                                          
     Interest income, net     (1.2 )                                        
     Other income, net     (2.5 )                                        
    Income (loss) from operations     16.0     $ 14.6     $ 0.4     $ 5.3     $ (0.7 )   $ (3.6 )
    Depreciation and amortization     5.1       2.0       1.6       0.8       0.7       –  
    Severance     0.3       0.3       –       –       –       –  
    Other operating expense (gain), net     0.3       –       (0.1 )     –       –       0.4  
    Adjusted EBITDA   $ 21.8     $ 17.0     $ 1.8     $ 6.1     $ –     $ (3.2 )

    IDT Corporation
    Reconciliation of Earnings per share to Non-GAAP EPS
    (unaudited) in millions, except per share data. Figures may not foot due to rounding to millions.

          2Q25       2Q24  
                     
    Net income attributable to IDT Corporation   $ 20.3     $ 14.4  
    Adjustments (add) subtract:                
    Stock-based compensation     (0.9 )     (2.5 )
    Severance expense     (0.2 )     (0.3 )
    Other operating expense, net     (0.2 )     (0.3 )
    Total adjustments     (1.3 )     (3.1 )
    Income tax effect of total adjustments     (0.3 )     (0.6 )
          1.0       2.5  
    Non-GAAP net income   $ 21.3     $ 16.9  
                     
    Earnings per share:                
    Basic   $ 0.81     $ 0.57  
    Total adjustments     0.03       0.10  
    Non-GAAP – basic   $ 0.84     $ 0.67  
                     
    Weighted-average number of shares used in calculation of basic earnings per share     25.2       25.2  
                     
    Diluted   $ 0.80     $ 0.57  
    Total adjustments     0.04       0.10  
    Non-GAAP – diluted   $ 0.84     $ 0.67  
                     
    Weighted-average number of shares used in calculation of diluted earnings per share     25.3       25.3  


    *    *Explanation of Key Performance Metrics

    NRS’ recurring revenue is calculated by subtracting NRS’ revenue from POS terminal sales from its revenue in accordance with GAAP. NRS’ Monthly Average Recurring Revenue per Terminal is calculated by dividing NRS’ recurring revenue by the average number of active POS terminals during the period. The average number of active POS terminals is calculated by adding the beginning and ending number of active POS terminals during the period and dividing by two. NRS’ recurring revenue divided by the average number of active POS terminals is divided by three when the period is a fiscal quarter. Recurring revenue and Monthly Average Recurring Revenue per Terminal are useful for comparisons of NRS’ revenue and revenue per customer to prior periods and to competitors and others in the market, as well as for forecasting future revenue from the customer base.

    The NRS ‘Rule of 40’ score is a metric used to evaluate the performance of SaaS providers. It postulates that a SaaS company’s growth rate when added to its free cash flow rate should equal or exceed 40 percent. For NRS, the ‘Rule of 40’ result for 2Q25 is computed by adding the growth rate of NRS’ recurring revenue for 2Q25 compared to 2Q24 to NRS’ Adjusted EBITDA less CapEx as a percentage of total NRS revenue for the twelve months ended January 31, 2025. The ‘Rule of 40’ is a common SaaS industry metric to assess a company’s balance between growth and profitability. A total above 40 is thought to indicate a healthy combination of expansion and financial stability, making it a useful tool for investors and management to gauge the potential for long-term success and make informed decisions about resource allocation and business strategy.

    net2phone’s subscription revenue is calculated by subtracting net2phone’s equipment revenue and revenue generated by a legacy SIP trunking offering in Brazil from its revenue in accordance with GAAP. net2phone’s cloud communications and contact center offerings are priced on a per-seat basis, with customers paying based on the number of users in their organization. The number of seats served and subscription revenue trends and comparisons between periods are used in the analysis of net2phone’s revenues and direct cost of revenues and are strong indications of the top-line growth and performance of the business.

    net2phone’s subscription revenue per seat is calculated by dividing net2phone’s subscription revenue, as defined in the preceding paragraph, by the average number of seats served during the period. The average number of seats served is calculated by adding the beginning and ending number of seats served and dividing by two. Subscription revenue per seat is the amount of revenue generated by each seat sold during the period. It provides a basis for pricing seat-based services, as well as for comparing performance in past periods and projecting future revenue, and for comparing the value of each seat served to competitors.

    net2phone’s operating margin is calculated by dividing GAAP income from operations by GAAP revenue for the period indicated. Operating margin measures the percentage that each dollar of revenue contributes to profitability. Operating margin is useful for evaluating current period profitability relative to sales, for comparisons to prior period performance, for forecasting future income from operations levels based on projected levels of sales, and for comparing net2phone’s relative profitability to its competitors and peers.

    net2phone’s Adjusted EBITDA margin is calculated by dividing net2phone’s Adjusted EBITDA, a Non-GAAP measure, by net2phone’s GAAP revenue for the comparable quarter or period. Adjusted EBITDA margin measures the percentage that each dollar of revenue contributes to profitability before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, and other adjustments as described in the Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures. net2phone’s Adjusted EBITDA margin is useful for evaluating current period profitability relative to sales, for comparisons to prior period performance, for forecasting future Adjusted EBITDA levels based on projected levels of sales, and for comparing net2phone’s relative profitability to its competitors and peers.

    BOSS Money’s Average Revenue per Transaction is calculated by dividing BOSS Money’s revenue in accordance with GAAP by the number of transactions during the period. Average Revenue per Transaction is useful for comparisons of BOSS Money’s revenue per transaction to prior periods and to competitors and others in the market, as well as for forecasting future revenue based on transaction trends.

    # # #

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Diamondback Energy Prices Offering of Senior Notes

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MIDLAND, Texas, March 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Diamondback Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: FANG) (“Diamondback”) announced today that it has priced an offering (the “Notes Offering”) of $1,200,000,000 in aggregate principal amount of 5.550% senior notes that will mature on April 1, 2035 (the “Notes”). The price to the public is 99.937% of the principal amount of the Notes.

    Diamondback intends to use the net proceeds from the Notes Offering for general corporate purposes, including, without limitation, paying a portion of the cash consideration for the pending acquisition of certain subsidiaries of Double Eagle IV Midco, LLC and paying fees, costs and expenses related thereto.   The Notes Offering is expected to close on March 20, 2025, subject to customary closing conditions.

    The Notes will be sold in a registered offering pursuant to an effective shelf registration statement on Form S-3ASR that was previously filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, a prospectus supplement and related base prospectus for the Notes Offering.

    BofA Securities, Inc., Barclays Capital Inc., PNC Capital Markets LLC and TD Securities (USA) LLC have served as joint book-running managers for the Notes Offering. When available, copies of the prospectus supplement and related base prospectus for the Notes Offering may be obtained from BofA Securities, Inc. at NC1-022-02-25, 201 North Tryon Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28255-0001, Attn: Prospectus Department, by email to dg.prospectus_requests@bofa.com and toll free at 1-800-294-1322; Barclays Capital Inc. at c/o Broadridge Financial Solutions, 1155 Long Island Avenue, Edgewood, NY 11717, by email to barclaysprospectus@broadridge.com and toll free at 1-888-603-5847; PNC Capital Markets LLC at 300 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor, Pittsburgh, PA 15222, by email to pnccmprospectus@pnc.com and toll free at 1-855-881-0697 and TD Securities (USA) LLC at 1 Vanderbilt Avenue, 11th Floor, New York, NY 10017 and toll free at 1-855-495-9846. Electronic copies of the prospectus supplement and related base prospectus for the Notes Offering will also be available on the website of the Securities and Exchange Commission at www.sec.gov.

    This press release is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of an offer to buy any of these securities and shall not constitute an offer, solicitation or sale in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale is unlawful. The Notes Offering may only be made by means of a prospectus supplement and related base prospectus.

    About Diamondback Energy, Inc.

    Diamondback is an independent oil and natural gas company headquartered in Midland, Texas focused on the acquisition, development, exploration and exploitation of unconventional, onshore oil and natural gas reserves in the Permian Basin in West Texas.

    Forward Looking Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws, including those relating to the expected timing of the closing of the Notes Offering. All statements, other than historical facts, that address activities that Diamondback assumes, plans, expects, believes, intends or anticipates (and other similar expressions) will, should or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are based on management’s current beliefs, based on currently available information, as to the outcome and timing of future events. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties that could cause the results to differ materially from those expected by the management of Diamondback. Information concerning these risks and other factors can be found in Diamondback’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Forms 10-K, 10-Q, 8-K, the preliminary prospectus supplement filed by Diamondback for the Notes Offering and any amendments or supplements thereto, which can be obtained free of charge on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s web site at http://www.sec.gov. Diamondback undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement.

    Investor Contact:
    Adam Lawlis
    +1 432.221.7467
    alawlis@diamondbackenergy.com

    Source: Diamondback Energy, Inc.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Palomar Holdings, Inc. to Host Investor Day

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LA JOLLA, Calif., March 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Palomar Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLMR) (“Palomar” or “Company”) today announced that it will host an Investor Day at The Pierre in New York City on Thursday, March 20, 2025. The presentation will begin at 8:30 a.m. ET and conclude at approximately 12:45 p.m. ET.

    The event will feature Palomar’s Chairman and CEO, Mac Armstrong, alongside members of its senior leadership team. The Company will provide a comprehensive overview of the business, focusing on Palomar’s specialty products, operations, and the Palomar 2X philosophy.

    The presentation portion of the event will be available via webcast on the Events and Presentations section of the Company’s Investor Relations website at ir.palomarspecialty.com. A webcast replay will be available following the event at approximately 6pm ET at the same website.

    If you plan to attend in-person or have any questions regarding logistics for the in-person event, please e-mail Jamie Lillis at jlillis@soleburystrat.com.

    About Palomar Holdings, Inc.
    Palomar Holdings, Inc. is the holding company of subsidiaries Palomar Specialty Insurance Company (“PSIC”), Palomar Specialty Reinsurance Company Bermuda Ltd. (“PSRE”), Palomar Insurance Agency, Inc. (“PIA”), Palomar Excess and Surplus Insurance Company (“PESIC”), Palomar Underwriters Exchange Organization, Inc (“PUEO”), Palomar Crop Insurance Services, Inc, and First Indemnity of America Insurance Company (acquired 1/1/2025). Palomar’s consolidated results also include Laulima Reciprocal Exchange, a variable interest entity for which the Company is the primary beneficiary. Palomar is an innovative specialty insurer serving residential and commercial clients in five product categories: Earthquake, Inland Marine and Other Property, Casualty, Fronting, and Crop. Palomar’s insurance subsidiaries, Palomar Specialty Insurance Company, Palomar Specialty Reinsurance Company Bermuda Ltd., and Palomar Excess and Surplus Insurance Company, have a financial strength rating of “A” (Excellent) from A.M. Best.

    Safe Harbor Statement
    Palomar cautions you that statements contained in this press release may regard matters that are not historical facts but are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on the company’s current beliefs and expectations. The inclusion of forward-looking statements should not be regarded as a representation by Palomar that any of its plans will be achieved. Actual results may differ from those set forth in this press release due to the risks and uncertainties inherent in the Company’s business. The forward-looking statements are typically, but not always, identified through use of the words “believe,” “expect,” “enable,” “may,” “will,” “could,” “intends,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “predict,” “probable,” “potential,” “possible,” “should,” “continue,” and other words of similar meaning. Actual results could differ materially from the expectations contained in forwardlooking statements as a result of several factors, including unexpected expenditures and costs, unexpected results or delays in development and regulatory review, regulatory approval requirements, the frequency and severity of adverse events and competitive conditions. These and other factors that may result in differences are discussed in greater detail in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update such statements to reflect events that occur or circumstances that exist after the date hereof. All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement, which is made under the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

    To learn more, visit PLMR.com

    Follow Palomar on LinkedIn: @PLMRInsurance

    Contact
    Media Inquiries
    Lindsay Conner
    1-551-206-6217
    lconner@plmr.com

    Investor Relations
    Jamie Lillis
    1-203-428-3223
    investors@plmr.com

    Source: Palomar Holdings, Inc.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senators Markey, Whitehouse, Alsobrooks, EPW Democrats Rip Zeldin’s Scheme to Cripple EPA

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
    Zeldin’s illegal plan to gut the federal agency is poised to torpedo environmental safeguards while undermining the Constitution
    Washington (March 5, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) joined Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), Committee member Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-M.D), who represents nearly 150,000 federal workers, and all EPW Democrats in demanding answers from EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin about his illegal scheme to gut the agency. President Trump recently announced that Administrator Zeldin planned to fire 65 percent of staff at EPA, but Administrator Zeldin subsequently clarified that he actually plans to slash EPA spending by at least 65 percent. 
    Either would be devastating.  Firing more than 10,000 EPA workers or making deep budget cuts would make it impossible for the agency to protect the American public’s clean air and water and to prevent toxic pollution, and any of Administrator Zeldin’s efforts to manipulate agency spending levels would violate congressional authority.
    “Your intention to do either of these things—fire large numbers of EPA staff or proceed with deep budget cuts—raises serious concerns.  EPA could not fulfill its mission of protecting our air and water and preventing toxic pollution if its staff or budget were cut by 65 percent.  Moreover, you do not have legal authority to set EPA’s spending levels; that power is reserved under Article I of the Constitution to Congress,” wrote Senators Markey, Whitehouse, Alsobrooks, Sanders, Merkley, Kelly, Padilla, Schiff, and Blunt Rochester. 
    “[A]ny decision to fire large numbers of EPA staff calls into question the probity of the statements you made on this subject at your confirmation hearing not even two months ago.  Each time you were asked about your plans for agency staffing, you assured Committee members that you looked forward to working ‘collaboratively’ with EPA’s dedicated staff …. During your confirmation hearing, you also told members of the Committee on eight separate occasions that you would ‘not prejudge[e] outcomes’ or made substantially identical statements.  It is difficult to understand how a decision to cut two-thirds of a federal agency’s staff or budget when Trump-affiliated groups had been urging a similar course of action since before President Trump even took office is anything other than a ‘prejudged outcome,’” the Senators continued.  “Please describe how you believe that any largescale firing of EPA employees will ‘support career staff who have dedicated’ themselves to EPA’s mission and ‘foster a collaborative culture within the agency,’ as you pledged under oath to do during your confirmation hearing.”
    In accordance with the President’s directives to gut the civil service, agency heads are required to submit their plans for cutting staff to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) by March 13, 2025. EPW Democrats are demanding answers from Administrator Zeldin by March 11, 2025.
    The text of the letter is below, and a full version (with footnotes) is available HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Markey, Warren, Colleagues Call for Investigation Into Trump’s Purge of Workers Protecting Americans’ Health and Safety

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
    Air travel, flood and wildfire response, infectious disease control, nuclear safety, veterans’ healthcare and benefits, food safety are all at risk after massive layoffs
    “Congress and the public need to better understand the full impact of these terminations on our health and safety, given that the Administration and Musk clearly do not.”  
    Text of Letter (PDF) 
    Washington (March 6, 2025) – Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) sent a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting an investigation into how the recent mass firings of probationary federal workers have impacted Americans’ health and safety. 
    In recent weeks, President Trump has fired at least 25,000 probationary federal employees. Despite termination letters from many agencies citing “poor performance,” probationary employees appear to have been fired in indiscriminate batches, regardless of their individual performance. 
    Thousands of these fired workers were responsible for protecting Americans’ health and safety, across areas like air travel, flood and wildfire response, infectious disease control, nuclear safety, veterans’ healthcare and benefits, food safety, and managing the opioid epidemic. 
    The Trump Administration has since called some of the firings an “accident” and scrambled to rehire certain workers — including people who’d worked on the bird flu outbreak, nuclear security, veterans’ health, and health services in Tribal communities. To date, agencies have not been able to rehire all of the workers affected and continue to face critical workforce shortages. 
    “Rather than make government more efficient, these firings appear to have created massive inefficiencies and put the American people at risk,” wrote the senators. 
    As the Trump administration implements its “plans for large-scale reductions in force,” over 200,000 probationary workers are expected to be laid off, and private companies are expected to benefit. In fact, some private companies, including some owned by or connected to Elon Musk and other Trump officials, have begun entering agencies to take the role of fired workers. 
    “Unlike the federal government, those companies are not responsible for prioritizing Americans’ health and safety interests, and we are concerned that they will not do so,” said the senators. 
    The senators requested that GAO’s investigation cover the duties of fired probationary workers, attempts to hire those workers back, data on how the terminations are impacting Americans’ health and safety, and more. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Markey, Warren, Wyden, Schumer, Lawmakers Seek IRS Watchdog Investigation Into Trump Administration’s Decision To Gut IRS

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
    Mass firings, office closures could delay taxpayers’ refunds, allow major abuses to go undetected or unaddressed
    “Reducing IRS staff will have profound effects, hindering the agency’s ability to process … tax returns … potentially causing delays for taxpayers waiting for refunds, and inhibiting the agency’s ability to conduct audits to catch wealthy tax cheats.”
    Text of Letter (PDF) 
    Washington (March 6, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) joined Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, and their colleagues in sending a letter to the Acting Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), urging her to launch an investigation into the Trump Administration’s decision to fire nearly 7,000 Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employees and close over 100 Taxpayer Assistance Centers (TACs). The letter follows new reporting revealing that the IRS is preparing to gut half of its workforce, a decision that threatens to undermine the IRS’s ability to crack down on wealthy tax cheats and provide quality service for American taxpayers.
    The following 15 senators signed on: Minority Leader Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senators Merkley (D-Ore.), King (I-M.E.), Shaheen (D-N.H.), Booker (D-N.J.), Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Durbin (D-Ill.), Kim (D-N.J.), Murray (D-Wash.), Sanders (I-Vt.), Van Hollen (D-Md.), Welch (D-Vt.), Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Reed (D-R.I.), and Hirono (D-Hawaii)
    “Given the implications these mass firings and office closures may have on the quality of service provided by the IRS, an evaluation by your office would be consistent with your mission of ‘conducting audits and investigations that improve IRS operations,’” explained the lawmakers.
    Before President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which provided the IRS with $80 billion over the next 10 years, the agency suffered from chronic underfunding and understaffing. This major investment allowed the IRS to recover $1.3 billion from tax cheats, improve access to IRS services, and launch more digital tools to help Americans file their taxes. 
    “These investments made through the IRA will—if not rolled back by President Trump and Republicans in Congress—pay for themselves many times over… every dollar (spent) on the IRS’s enforcement activities results in $5 to $9 of revenue to fund investments in programs for the American people,” wrote the lawmakers.
    Last month, the Trump Administration ordered the IRS to begin firing employees. The massive layoffs have already begun “shaking the foundations of the tax agency during filing season.” Reducing IRS staff and offices will profoundly affect Americans filing their taxes this season, slowing the agency’s ability to process the over 140 million expected individual tax returns and potentially causing delays for taxpayer refunds. The IRS also plans to close an additional 110 TACs around the country, which will harm Americans seeking to access critical taxpayer services.
    The senators asked the Acting Inspector General to determine if the Trump Administration’s recent decisions undermine the IRS’s progress, and if the firings and closures impact the agency’s mission to “(p)rovide America’s taxpayers top-quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and enforce the law with integrity and fairness to all.” 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Markey, Leader Schumer, Senators Whitehouse and Van Hollen Call for Answers from Citibank on Climate Bank Funding Freeze

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
       Letter Text (PDF)
    Washington (March 6, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee and co-author of the original National Climate Bank Act with Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), a member of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, together with Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, today called for answers from Jane Fraser, CEO of Citigroup, and Sunil Garg, CEO of Citibank North America (N.A.), on the reported freeze of federal investments made under the National Clean Investment Fund (NCIF) and Clean Communities Investment Accelerator (CCIA)—programs that are part of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and held in Citibank N.A accounts. The affected accounts contain legally obligated federal funds appropriated in the Inflation Reduction Act aimed at powering domestic investment in low-cost clean energy and energy efficiency. The freeze appears to relate to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin’s desire to claw back these grants. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, and Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, also signed the letter.
    In the letter the lawmakers write, “If public reporting and information obtained by Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Democrats is accurate, the federal funds in these accounts have been frozen for more than two weeks without explanation from either Citibank or the EPA. Without access to these funds, grantees will be hard pressed to cover basic operating expenses, such as payroll or rent, much less satisfy their mission of delivering cost-saving investments in underserved communities across the country. According to recent reporting, a prolonged account freeze may drive many of the nonprofit grantees to bankruptcy or default.”
    The lawmakers continued, “These reports suggest that Trump DOJ and EPA officials are trying to rescind the legally obligated funding at issue by fabricating claims of financial mismanagement and launching sham investigations.”
    The lawmakers request responses by March 15, 2025, to questions that include:
    What NCIF, CCIA, or GGRF grantee accounts have been paused, frozen, or closed by Citibank? When did Citibank pause, freeze, or close these accounts?
    Why did Citibank pause, freeze, or close grantee accounts? 
    If Citibank has paused, frozen, closed, or otherwise limited access to grantee accounts, what is the legal authority for doing so?
    Does Citibank have plans to resume grantees’ access to, or use of, their accounts and to the federal monies contained therein? 
    On February 24, 2025, Senator Markey joined Senator Whitehouse and all Democratic members of the Environment and Public Works Committee in a letter to EPA demanding answers about Administrator Lee Zeldin’s illegal efforts to claw back these federal investments in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. On February 19, 2025, Senator Markey led a letter with Senators Van Hollen, Whitehouse, and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to the Department of Justice regarding the forced resignation of the head of the criminal division at the U.S. Attorney’s office in the District of Columbia, Denise Cheung, after she declined to pursue an unwarranted criminal investigation that would have frozen accounts with federal funds held at Citibank.
    Senator Markey secured numerous provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act, including the creation of a $27 billion national climate financing network based on his National Climate Bank Act. Following the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, Senators Markey and Van Hollen and Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (MI-06), the House lead on the climate financing legislation, welcomed the launch of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund in April 2023.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn on Pres. Trump’s Efforts to End Ukraine War

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
    WASHINGTON – Today on the floor, U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) lauded President Trump’s efforts to restore peace around the world through strength and deterrence and to broker an agreement that would end the war between Russia and Ukraine. Excerpts of Sen. Cornyn’s remarks are below, and video can be found here.
    “I was glad to see President Zelensky clearly express his gratitude to President Trump and the American taxpayer for our support for the country of Ukraine over the last three years.”
    “It’s time for the war in Ukraine to end. President Trump is right, but the more difficult question is how?”
    “We should all be grateful to President Trump for taking on the difficult but essential task of brokering a peace agreement to end this devastating war.”
    “In order to achieve a lasting peace, both sides of the conflict must be willing to sit down and negotiate and make concessions.”
    “I’m glad to see that President Zelensky has indicated a willingness for Ukraine to do so, in part through a critical minerals arrangement with the United States government.”
    “There must be some real and tangible and enforceable security assurances for Ukraine.”
    “President Zelensky and President Putin are not fighting this war in some sort of vacuum—allies of the United States and adversaries alike around the world are watching.”
    “What President Trump is doing to secure peace in this dangerous world is an act of moral leadership and, I believe, divinely inspired. Jesus said in the Beatitudes, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.’”
    “If President Trump is successful in securing a lasting peace, I for one think he will have earned the Nobel Peace Prize.”
    “It’s my sincere hope that President Zelensky and President Putin will both accept the olive branch offered by President Trump by coming to the table and by making the necessary, enforceable concessions to ensure a lasting peace.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: PHOTO: Cornyn Meets with Port San Antonio Leaders

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) met yesterday with executives from Port San Antonio to discuss the Port’s efforts to advance technologies in aerospace, cybersecurity, defense, manufacturing, and global trade. See photo below.

    This image is in the public domain, but those wishing to do so may credit the Office of U.S. Senator John Cornyn.
    Senator John Cornyn, a Republican from Texas, is a member of the Senate Finance, Judiciary, Intelligence, Foreign Relations, and Budget Committees.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senate Indian Affairs Committee Advances Peters’ Bipartisan Legislation to Settle Longstanding Land Claims of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Clear Title of Current Landowners

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Michigan Gary Peters
    WASHINGTON, DC – The Senate Indian Affairs Committee advanced bipartisan, bicameral legislation authored by U.S. Senator Gary Peters (MI) to settle the longstanding land claims of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC).  
    “For years, the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community has worked to settle these land claims and provide clear title to those who currently own the property in question,” said Senator Peters. “Our Tribal partners and local community members agree – this legislation would help right this wrong, and I’m pleased it has now advanced to the full Senate.” 
    Through Treaties signed in 1842 and 1854, the KBIC was granted occupancy over a large area of land established as the L’Anse Reservation in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. Despite those treaties, thousands of acres of reservation land were taken by the federal government without compensation and awarded to the State of Michigan between 1855 and 1937.  
    The Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Land Claim Settlement Act of 2025 – which Peters reintroduced with U.S. Senator Elissa Slotkin (MI) – would clear the title of current landowners in the community and provide compensation to the KBIC through the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI). U.S. Representative Jack Bergman (R-MI-01) introduced companion legislation in the House. 
    “This legislation represents our Community, our neighbors, and the Michigan delegation coming together to acknowledge the unlawful taking of our lands and provide a solution for a better future for the Tribe and our neighbors. This settlement has been generations in the making, and the Tribal Council and the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community share our sincere gratitude to Senator Peters, Senator Slotkin, and Representative Bergman for their leadership to right this historic wrong,” said KBIC President Robert “RD” Curtis, Jr. and the KBIC Tribal Council.
    The KBIC’s land claims involve the dispossession of between approximately 1,333 and 2,720 acres of land transferred by the United States government to the State of Michigan as compensation for the construction of the Sault Ste. Marie Canal, as well as approximately 2,743 acres of swamplands. The KBIC asserts that as a result of the 1842 and 1854 Treaties, these lands were not available for transfer and therefore transferred illegally. The KBIC contends that the inappropriate transfer of these lands has created substantial economic and other harm, through the loss of valuable land in prime locations along Lake Superior that could have been used for a variety of revenue-generating activities over the past 150 years. Meanwhile, non-Indian individuals, entities, and local governments have since acquired the land at issue – in good faith – and now seek to ensure they possess clear title to the land.   
    The bill – which unanimously passed the Senate last Congress – would authorize funds through the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) that may be used by the KBIC for governmental services, economic development, natural resource protection, and land acquisition.  

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: At Hearing, Trump’s Deputy Treasury Secretary Nominee Admits Republicans’ “Magic Math” Won’t Pay for Billionaire Tax Cuts

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    March 06, 2025
    Warren: “Congressional Republicans want to use ‘magic math’ to pass giant tax cuts, and then try to tell the American people those tax cuts cost nothing.”
    Video of Exchange (YouTube) 
    Washington, D.C. – At a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) questioned Dr. Michael Faulkender, President Trump’s nominee for Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, on Republicans’ “magic math” for their plans to cut taxes for the ultra-wealthy. Republican leaders are increasingly supportive of using a “current policy baseline” for their tax package to hide the true cost of their proposed $4.6 trillion tax package.
    Congress’ independent scorekeepers have historically scored legislation using a “current law baseline,” which assumes that temporary tax cuts will expire and that extending those tax cuts will cost money. A current policy baseline, on the other hand, assumes that temporary tax cuts will not expire and that extending those tax cuts will cost $0. When pressed by Senator Warren on whether this gimmick actually produces additional revenue, Dr. Faulkender admitted, “I can’t imagine that it would.”
    Last month, Senator Warren sent a letter to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), which provides Members of Congress with revenue estimates for tax legislation. She pressed for answers on whether JCT has ever used a “current policy baseline” for official scoring purposes on the Senate floor, among other questions, to set the record straight on Republicans’ “magic math.”
    Ahead of his nomination hearing before the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Warren also sent a 32-page letter to Dr. Faulkender, pressing him to explain his views on his potential Treasury responsibilities.
    Transcript: Hearing to examine the nomination of Michael Faulkender, of Maryland, to be Deputy Secretary of the TreasurySenate Finance CommitteeMarch 6, 2025 
    Senator Elizabeth Warren: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. So, President Trump had exactly one big legislative accomplishment in his first term: a giant tax cut for millionaires, billionaires, and massive corporations. In fact, it was so giant that a big hunk of it lasted only eight years and still cost $2 trillion. Now, the eight years are up, so Republicans want to do another tax cut for the ultra-wealthy, which Congress’ non-partisan budget scorers say is going to cost $4.6 trillion this time. Now, Congressional Republicans say they care about the deficit, so they have a plan to fix things up: repeal math. Here’s their story: because they already had eight years of tax cuts that ran up the debt, Congressional Republicans claim that 10 more years of tax cuts will be free. They named this gimmick the ‘current policy baseline.’ They should have named it “magic math.” It is so nuts that when we need to figure out the cost of tax cuts, the Senate has never, never switched to it over using real math. 
    Now, Dr. Faulkender, if confirmed, you will play a role in whatever tax deal the Republicans put together. So let’s talk about math,“magic math” and real math. Dr. Faulkender, does renaming tax cuts produce any additional revenue?
    Michael Faulkender, Deputy Secretary-Designate, U.S. Department of the Treasury: Does renaming them–
    Senator Warren: Yes, calling them something different. Does that produce any additional revenue?
    Dr. Faulkender: I don’t think renaming something changes—if it changes behavior, it has the potential to change revenues.
    Senator Warren: Wait, so, are you saying renaming tax cuts produces additional revenue? Just renaming it?
    Dr. Faulkender: I can’t imagine that it would, unless it causes people to behave differently. 
    Senator Warren: Okay, I’ll take that as no. Fair enough? Claiming that somehow losing $4.6 trillion in tax revenues is free is just plain nuts. Congressional Republicans are hoping they can fool people long enough to deliver giveaways to their wealthy donors before anyone figures it out. But at the end of the day, Republicans cannot repeal math. A bunch of tax cuts for billionaires will cost $4.6 trillion.
    But congressional Republicans don’t like that answer. So, I’m wondering, if they love magic math so much, I want to ask the same question in reverse. If the Republicans’ idea of magically not counting the cost of tax cuts for billionaires makes sense, what about not counting the cost of tax cuts for ordinary people? That is, for extending the Child Tax Credit? 
    Dr. Faulkender, according to Republicans’ magic math, if extending the tax cuts is free, shouldn’t extending a temporary expansion of the Child Tax Credit also be free?
    Dr. Faulkender: Thank you, Senator. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act increased the child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000, and so if we allow that tax cut to expire, it would mean that the child tax credit would go back to the $1,000. 
    Senator Warren: Right. So, the question I’m asking is, using Republican “magic math,” if it is free to extend tax cuts for billionaires, isn’t it also free to extend tax cuts for poor kids? 
    Dr. Faulkender: Senator, I’m not familiar with magic math, but what I do know is that the American people look at the current tax code, what they paid last year and what they paid this year as the current environment. So, the question is, when we talk about extending it, I would argue that extending the TCJA is making sure that the American people don’t incur a $4.5 trillion tax increase.
    Senator Warren: So, you do think that renaming the tax cuts will produce $4.5 trillion in revenue? 
    Dr. Faulkender: No, Senator, I didn’t say that it had any impact on the bottom line deficit. I’m just saying when you ask me what a baseline is, to me, the baseline is what I’m currently doing.
    Senator Warren: I’m not asking you that. I’m asking you what it costs to put in $4.5 trillion in tax cuts. Look, if Republican “magic math” works, then why not extend it to everything we spend money on? How about the money we spent last year on roads and bridges or child care subsidies and the workers who process Social Security checks? Of course not. No one is going to do that. 
    Congressional Republicans want to use “magic math” to pass giant tax cuts, and then try to tell the American people those tax cuts cost nothing. Hard-working Americans understand that $4.6 trillion for a billionaire tax cut is not free. Congressional Republicans are trying to sell magic math so they can help billionaires, and fortunately, the American people are just not buying that. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Video: Department of State Press Briefing – March 6, 2025

    Source: United States of America – Department of State (video statements)

    Spokesperson Tammy Bruce leads the Department Press Briefing, at the Department of State, on March 6, 2025.

    ———-
    Under the leadership of the President and Secretary of State, the U.S. Department of State leads America’s foreign policy through diplomacy, advocacy, and assistance by advancing the interests of the American people, their safety and economic prosperity. On behalf of the American people we promote and demonstrate democratic values and advance a free, peaceful, and prosperous world.

    The Secretary of State, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is the President’s chief foreign affairs adviser. The Secretary carries out the President’s foreign policies through the State Department, which includes the Foreign Service, Civil Service and U.S. Agency for International Development.

    Get updates from the U.S. Department of State at www.state.gov and on social media!
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/statedept
    X: https://x.com/StateDept
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/statedept
    Flickr: https://flickr.com/photos/statephotos/

    Subscribe to the State Department Blog: https://www.state.gov/blogs
    Watch on-demand State Department videos: https://video.state.gov/
    Subscribe to The Week at State e-newsletter: http://ow.ly/diiN30ro7Cw

    State Department website: https://www.state.gov/
    Careers website: https://careers.state.gov/
    White House website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/
    Terms of Use: https://state.gov/tou

    #StateDepartment #DepartmentofState #Diplomacy

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3baWZQE_2s

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Transcript of COM Regular Press Briefing, March 6, 2025

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    March 6, 2025

    SPEAKER:  Ms. Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department, IMF

     *  *  *  *  *

    MS. KOZACK: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to this IMF press briefing. It is very good to see you all, both those of you who are here in person and, of course, our colleagues online as well.

    I am Julie Kozak, Director of the Communications Department. As usual, this briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. I will start with a short announcement and then take your questions in person on Webex and via the Press Center. 

    The 2025 Spring Meetings of the IMF and World Bank Group will take place from Monday, April 21 through Saturday, April 26. Press registration to attend the spring meetings in person in Washington D.C. is now open and you can register through www.IMFconnect.org. 

    And with that, I will now open the floor for your questions. For those connecting virtually, please turn on both your camera and microphone when speaking. And with that, over to you. 

    QUESTIONER: If the Congress does not approve the future agreement, as it is established by the local law, does the IMF give the money to Argentina? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, so that is a question on Argentina. Any other questions on Argentina? I do not see any hands up in the room. Let us go online. QUESTIONER: Do you think we are already in the final stage? And what remains to announce the Staff Agreement with the IMF?

    QUESTIONER: Good morning. I was wondering about also there have been versions of a new loan up to $20 billion and the first deployment of $8 billion this year. Can you confirm that, or can you give us an insight into the fresh funds that could be coming in the new agreement? And also, when can we expect a signing of the letter of intent? 

    QUESTIONER: So, my question is about the Congress. President Milei confirmed that the staff-level agreement must be approved by the Parliament as indicated by the Argentine law. So, is that also a requirement from the IMF itself or could the President sign a decree avoiding the current law that requires the staff-level agreement to be approved by Parliament. 

    QUESTIONER: I want to ask about the scope of the potential agreement with Argentina. There are reports out saying it could be as high, or there is an expectation it could be as high as $20 billion.

    QUESTIONER: I think a few people have already asked, but when [do] you expect to reach a staff-level agreement, whether, as the Argentine government has said, it is only the final numbers that need to be agreed and not other technical aspects? And whether the IMF requires that the entirety of the SLA be reviewed by Congress for approval or if whether a general outline produced by the government will be enough? 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, very good. So, with that, let me go ahead and talk about Argentina. So, first, I just want to start by saying, as I think many of you know, both the Managing Director and the First Deputy Managing Director recently met with the Argentine authorities. And as they recently emphasized, we are continuing to make good progress toward a program, and we are working constructively with the Argentine authorities in this regard. The authorities’ stabilization and growth plan is delivering significant results.

    It has made notable strides in reducing inflation, stabilizing the economy, and fostering a return to growth in the country, and poverty is finally beginning to decline in Argentina. To sustain these early gains, there is a shared understanding about the need to continue to adopt a consistent set of fiscal, monetary and exchange rate policies, while very importantly, advancing growth enhancing reforms. And the new program would build on the progress achieved so far while also addressing Argentina’s remaining challenges. 

    Now, with respect to some of the questions regarding Congressional approval, we do take note of President Milei’s commitment to seek congressional support for a new IMF supported program. As we have often said in the past, strong ownership and broad support are key to the program’s success, 

    Here, I want to emphasize, though, that securing congressional support is a decision of the authorities as legislated in Argentine domestic law. And at the same time, of course, as I just noted, broad political and social support can enhance program implementation. Questions regarding the specific process on achieving or seeking congressional support should be addressed really to the Argentine authorities because it is a matter of domestic law. 

    From our side, as I noted, the negotiations are continuing in a constructive manner. In terms of the process from the IMF side. Once the negotiations are completed, as with any IMF program or proposed program, the final arrangement, the documents, will require approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. And we will provide further updates as we have them. 

    With respect to some of the questions about the details of the negotiations, the potential size of the program. All I can say right now is this is still under discussion as part of the ongoing and constructive dialogue that we are having with the authorities. And we will provide an update when we have more information that we can share with you. 

    QUESTIONER: On Lebanon, so following recent reports that the Lebanese government is in discussions with IMF over a potential deal on its financial default in public debt. I just want to see if the IMF can confirm these reports. If so, what does it look like? Are there any contingencies to this? And will there be an IMF mission visiting Lebanon? Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Lebanon is that an IMF team will visit Lebanon very soon, March 10th to 14th. This mission is aimed at, of course, meeting the new authorities, discussing Lebanon’s recent economic developments, its reconstruction needs, and the authorities’ economic priorities in the near-term. This is a fact-finding mission that will take place. But beyond this fact-finding mission, as we look ahead, future next steps could include helping the authorities to formulate a comprehensive economic reform program.

    Our staff continues to be closely engaged with the authorities. We are providing policy advice and capacity development to help the authorities’ efforts to rebuild Lebanon’s economy and institutions in coordination with other international partners. And that is what I have for now on Lebanon. 

    QUESTIONER: I wanted to ask you about what is happening in the United States. The trade wars have begun, and we are seeing some impact already, both in terms of market reaction and a lot of volatility in the markets, ups, and downs. We are also seeing some interesting developments in terms of bond markets and yields; it is going to increase the cost of borrowing. So, I wanted to ask you if you, at this point, I know we’ve asked this question before, but I wonder if you’ve got an additional assessment, as we’re now seeing some of these policies that had been promised taking effect, and whether you can say now whether you’re expecting an impact on the global economy and also on the U.S. economy and the affected economies that have been targeted thus far — China, Canada, Mexico. 

    QUESTIONER: As a follow up to [that] question, does the IMF consider that the ongoing developments of the U.S. tariffs and trade wars would push other nations to seek more trade relations and more alliances with other economic organizations and trade organizations such as BRICS, for example, or others? And broadly speaking, what is the IMF assessment of the global fragmentation that is going on right now? Do you see that it is slowing down or opposite it is moving faster, taking into account the latest developments in the United States?

    QUESTIONER: I would like to focus on the development of 10 years of U.S. bond yield movement. The 10-year bond yield now decreased, dropping substantially. And what does it mean? What is the implication of the movement? Does it represent some U.S. recession or U.S. economy? 

    QUESTIONER: With the tariffs actually now in place, has the IMF undertook a study to determine the potential impact on small island states that are heavily dependent on flows and goods and commodities coming out of the United States, more specifically, those countries within the Caribbean region who are very much dependent and could face significant inflationary pressures based on these tariffs?

    MS. KOZACK: So, first I want to just step back a little bit to recognize that we have seen now several new and significant developments over the past few days. The U.S. has imposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico as well as additional tariffs on China. Canada and China have, in response, announced tariffs on some U.S. goods and other measures. And Mexico has indicated that it will provide more details in the coming days.

    And as we have said before, you know, while assessing the full impact of tariffs on economic activity and inflation will depend on many factors, we do expect to provide an analysis of this, certainly at the global level and for the most affected countries at the time of our World Economic Outlook update in April. And of course we will also cover this issue, I imagine, in some of the regional updates where relevant. And I want to also emphasize that as part of our bilateral surveillance with countries, the individual Article IV reports this topic will also be covered to the extent that the countries are affected. 

    What I can say today is that if sustained the impact of the U.S. tariffs on Canada and Mexico can be expected to have a significant adverse economic impact on those countries given their very strong integration and exposure to the U.S. market. 

    Now, more broadly, there were some questions about financial market movements. So let me also just step back for a moment on some of these, and here I want to refer to some remarks that our Managing Director has been making recently. As she’s been saying, we are now in the midst of significant transformations, and these include the rapid advance of AI to changing patterns of capital flows and trade. She has also been mentioning that trade is no longer the engine of global growth that it used to be. 

    For example, during the period of 2000 to 2019, global trade growth reached nearly 6 percent on an annual basis, whereas over the more recent period of 2022 to 2024, global trade is growing closer to 3 percent. So global trade growth has been on a downward — has declined. And of course, it is in this more global context that governments are recalibrating their approaches and adjusting policies. 

    I also want to recognize, of course, that we have seen increased volatility in financial markets. We see that in indicators such as the VIX. We also have seen indicators of global uncertainty showing an increase. And what will be critical to assess what the economic impact of this will be — will be whether these trends are short-lived or whether they are sustained. Generally speaking, our research shows that both historically and across countries, sustained periods of elevated uncertainty can be associated with both households and firms holding back on consumption and investment decisions. And as I said, we will be providing a comprehensive analysis of our views on the global economy and individual economies as part of the World Economic Outlook that will be released in April. 

    On the specific question on U.S. bond yields, we do recognize of course, that U.S. bond yields have moved lower since the beginning of the year. And it does seem that on that basis markets may be reappraising or reassessing their views, particularly on the outlook for monetary policy. I will stop there and move on.

    QUESTIONER: When is the IMF Board expected to review and approve the next disbursement for Ukraine? Are there any remaining conditions or procedural steps that Ukraine must fulfill before approval? And the Ukrainian government is engaging in debt restructuring efforts with its creditors. How does the IMF assess Ukraine’s debt sustainability and what role does this play in bord’s decision making process regarding future disbursement announcements?

    QUESTIONER: So, to follow up on previous question. In February, you stated, that Ukraine would have access to about U.S. $900 million for the next review. Now we are speaking about $400 million. So, why the IMF has made a decision to adjust to the total sum of disbursement that will be provided to Ukraine?

    QUESTIONER: And do you think that it can impact financial stability of Ukrainian economy or there is no risk for them? 

    QUESTIONER: How do you expect the freezing of the U.S. aid for Ukraine might impact the program you have already on course right now? And how does this affect the global plan that had been made like a year ago or two years ago now? 

    QUESTIONER: I just want to follow up the last question about the impact — what the impact Trump administration is doing. Does this impact the IMF projections on Ukraine this and next year? 

    QUESTIONER: An adjacent question, maybe related to the prospect for ending the war. And, you know, we have seen economic developments in Russia continue to percolate along even though the war has been going on and there have been sanctions. Have you started to look at what the end of the war could mean for both the Russian and Ukrainian economies in terms of, you know, perhaps, you know, assuming that there would be an end of sanctions once there was a cessation of hostilities, whether that would give a boost to the Russian economy, maybe the European economy in general could lower costs, things like that? So just kind of walk us through what you are seeing there. 

    MS. KOZACK: Okay, let me go ahead on Ukraine. So, just to bring everyone up to speed. So, on February 28th, the IMF staff, and the Ukrainian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Seventh Review of the four-year EFF arrangement. This is subject to approval of the IMF’s Executive Board. Ukraine is expected to draw, as noted, about U.S. $400 million, and that would bring total disbursements under the program to U.S. $10.1 billion.

    I just want to note that program performance in Ukraine remains strong. All of the end December quantitative performance criteria were met, and understandings were reached between the Ukrainian authorities and IMF staff on a set of policies and reforms to sustain macroeconomic stability. The structural reform agenda in Ukraine is continuing to make good progress, and there are strong commitments from the Ukrainian authorities in a number of other areas. 

    Now on some of the specific questions, first on the matter of the disbursement, what I can say there is that it is not unusual over the life of a program for the pattern of disbursements to shift based on evolving balance of payments needs. And that is what has happened in this case. It is also important to emphasize that the overall size of the program, which is $15.6 billion, remains unchanged. And so that shift in disbursement pattern reflects the shifting balance of payments pattern for Ukraine. 

    So, on the issue the debt restructuring and debt process, what I can say there is that restoring debt sustainability in Ukraine hinges on continued implementation of the authority’s debt restructuring strategy, where completing the treatment of the GDP warrants remains important. And it also hinges very much on continuation of the revenue-based fiscal adjustment strategy, which is supported under the program. And as you know, Ukraine’s debt has been assessed in the last review to be sustainable on a forward-looking basis contingent on these two areas that I just mentioned. And of course, there will be a revised debt sustainability assessment as part of the ongoing review. 

    With respect to the other question, what I can say here is that the Ukrainian economy, you know, has shown continued resilience despite the challenges arising from the war. At the time of the Seventh Review, the last review, we estimated GDP growth to be 3.5 percent in 2024. But we did expect it at that time to moderate to 2 to 3 percent in 2025. And that was reflecting some headwinds from labor constraints and damage to energy infrastructure, given the ongoing war. It is the case in general for Ukraine, and we have been saying this throughout the life of the program, that the outlook remains exceptionally uncertain, especially as the war continues and it is taking a heavy toll on Ukraine’s people, economy, and infrastructure. 

    On the more recent developments that you were referring to, we are following these developments very closely. It is premature at the moment to comment on them, but we are following them, and we will make an assessment in due course.

    And on your question, the answer is essentially the same. We are following the developments very closely, and we will, as developments evolve, be undertaking obviously an assessment of what a peace deal could potentially look like and what would be the implications for all of the involved parties. 

    QUESTIONER: Julie, can you on the basis of having studied previous conflicts ending, can you just give us divorced from Ukraine and Russia, but just can you give us an indication of what generally happens when a conflict ends, what that means? And is there anything that we can draw on, at least just from history? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, I do not have, you know, off the top of my head a piece of research that I can kind of point to in terms of the interest analysis. What I certainly can say is that we always, for all of our member countries, hope for peace and stability in all of our member countries. And I think at that moment this is really what I can say. But I take note of the importance of your point, and we will, I have no doubt, in due course be conducting all of the necessary analysis as events unfold.

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions mainly on Egypt. as Egypt is scheduled for 10th of March for the discussion of the Fourth Review of the EFF for the country, what are we expecting from this meeting? And if you please, could you update us on the RSF facility worth $1.2 billion for the country? Thank you so much. 

    QUESTIONER: I would second exactly those questions. And just to add to that, I know it says on the IMF Executive Board calendar that the Board will be discussing waivers of non-observance for some of the performance criteria related to Egypt’s loan program and modifications for others. Are you able to tell us any more about exactly which criteria the Board will be looking at? And on the RSF, if you are able to give us any more detail about the prospective value of that. I know it has been put at $1 billion before. A related question, not on Egypt but on Gaza. I would be interested to know if the IMF has begun to think, whether internally or with partners in the region, about what its potential role would be in funding a reconstruction plan for Gaza given the $50 billion, upwards of $50 billion, cost of any reconstruction. 

    QUESTIONER: I may repeat questions about the value of current tranche to be given to Egypt and the timing of when the central bank of Egypt to receive it. And also, I have another question about the program of state assets selling. Will we witness some steps, new steps in that program? Could it be connected with the decision to be taken in March?

    MS. KOZACK: And any other questions on Egypt? All right. And then I have a question that came in through the Press Center. I am going to read it out loud – ’Does the IMF’s approval of the fourth tranche to Egypt require Egypt to implement some reforms? And when will the Fifth Review of the loan be held? What is the estimated size of the loan allocated to Egypt, and here will it be dispersed in installments or in one lump sum?’

    On Egypt – on March 10th, our Executive Board will be discussing Egypt’s Article IV consultation and the fourth review under the EFF. It will also be discussing at the same time Egypt’s request for an RSF, the Resilience and Sustainability Facility. Subject to completion by the Executive Board, the authorities, would have access to $1.2 billion under the EFF. So, under the EFF program. And then in addition, subject again to approval by our Executive Board, the size of the RSF would be about U.S. $1.3 billion. Regarding the RSF, like all of the IMF programs, the RSF is also delivered in tranches. So, it is not one lump sum up front. It is a phased program where tranches are dispersed on the basis of conditions being met. 

    And with respect to some of the other questions, what I can say today is just that we will provide, of course, more details following the Board meeting and on the question of waivers and modifications and also the questions on the state-owned enterprises. And again, the board meeting will be on March 10th. 

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions related to Japan. Firstly, amid rising uncertainty due to President Trump’s tariff policy, I would like to ask you — ask your thoughts on whether the Bank of Japan, currently in a rate hike phase, should continue raising rate or take more cautious approach in assessing the impact. And secondly, President Trump recently made remarks suggesting that Japan and China are engaging in currency devaluation. I would appreciate it if you share your views on Japan’s foreign exchange policy. Thank you. 

    MS. KOZACK: So, maybe just stepping back to give a bit of context on Japan. What I can say on Japan is that on the growth side, growth this year is expected to strengthen, and we also expect inflation to converge to the Bank of Japan’s 2 percent target by the end of 2025. 

    In 2024, growth in Japan slowed due to some temporary supply disruptions. But since then, we have seen a strengthening in growth driven by domestic demand, particular — particularly private consumption in Japan and rising wages. And we expect this to continue into 2025, where we project growth, at the time of the January WEO, we projected growth at 1.1 percent for Japan in 2025. And of course, just to say that we will be updating this projection as part of the April forecast. 

    Looking at inflation — headline and core inflation, as I said, are expected to decline gradually toward the 2 percent target. We have been supportive of the Bank of Japan’s recent monetary policy decisions. We believe that these decisions will help anchor inflation expectations at the 2 percent target but also given balance risks around inflation, our assessment has been that further hikes in the policy interest rate should continue to be data dependent, and they should proceed at a gradual pace over time. 

     With respect to the question on the exchange rate, what I can say there is that the Japanese authorities have affirmed their commitment to a flexible exchange rate regime. Japan’s flexible exchange rate regime has helped the country or has helped the economy absorb the impact of shocks. And it also supports the focus of monetary policy on price stability. And at the same time, what I can say is that that flexible exchange rate regime is helping maintain an external position that is in line with fundamentals. 

    QUESTIONER: Could you give us an update on the negotiations for Ethiopia, please? And on El Salvador, the deal that you agreed on in December and was approved a couple of weeks ago involves the government not increasing its exposure to Bitcoin. Government has continued to buy through the Office of Bitcoin, which is linked to the presidential palace. But yesterday the Fund said that these purchases do not increase the government’s exposure to Bitcoin. Could you please explain that? 

    QUESTIONER: Also on El Salvador, obviously he was saying to not to not buy it as a government reserve. I just wanted to, I guess, contrast to the U.S. I mean, President Trump has very much announced a digital assets reserve, including Ethereum and other coins, as well as Bitcoin. And I wondered if the IMF could – can you comment on the U.S. program or how would you distinguish the two countries and why the IMF might be taking a different approach?

    MS. KOZACK: All right, let me go ahead and take the El Salvador question in Ethiopia and then we will go back. I see many hands up online. 

    So, on El Salvador, as you know, last week our Executive Board approved a 40-month Extended Fund Facility, EFF, for U.S. $1.4 billion and with an immediate disbursement of $113 million. The program is expected to catalyze financial and technical support from other IFIs. And this will lead to a combined total over the program period of about U.S. $3.5 billion of support for El Salvador. The goals of the program are to restore fiscal sustainability, rebuild external and financial buffers, strengthen governance and transparency, and ultimately create the conditions for stronger and more resilient growth. 

    Regarding Bitcoin, in particular, the program aims to address the risks associated with the Bitcoin project to protect consumers and investors, as well as to limit potential fiscal costs. So, to start, there were recent legal reforms that have made the acceptance of Bitcoin voluntary, and taxes can be paid only in U.S. dollars. Under the program, the government has committed to not accumulate for their Bitcoins at the level of the overall public sector. 

    Regarding the recent increase in Bitcoin holding by the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund, the authorities have confirmed that these are consistent with the agreed program conditionality, and we do remain engaged with the authorities on this important issue. 

    And then, to your question. We are obviously closely monitoring President Trump’s announcement in this area. The Presidential Working Group on Digital Asset Markets has not yet completed its work. So, we do not yet have details on the implementation of this proposal, but we will come back in due course. 

    And then turning to the question on Ethiopia. So just an update on Ethiopia. On January 17th, the IMF Executive Board completed the Second Review of the arrangement, the ECF arrangement for Ethiopia, and that allowed for a drawdown of about U.S. $245 million. The ECF arrangement supports the authorities’ reforms to address macroeconomic imbalances, restore external debt sustainability, and lay the foundation for strong private sector-led growth. 

    I can also just remind you that the Managing Director recently traveled to Ethiopia. She was there February 8th and 9th. She met with Prime Minister Abiy and his team to take stock of the economic reforms and the progress that is being made in the country. And she also took the opportunity to meet with other stakeholders, including representatives of the private sector. 

    QUESTIONER: My question is on USAID. USAID has now totally stopped its business. And to what extent do you see the impact, especially on lower income countries at the global level? And should you consider using your facility to support them just in case? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on this issue, we are obviously again paying close attention to developments, and we are working with our country authorities. But it is, at the same time, it is too early to really say what the precise impact may be. And so, we will come back in due course. For now, we are monitoring.

    QUESTIONER: I have a question on Senegal. Following a recent audit of the country’s debt, it was found to be 99.7 percent of GDP. That was in 2023. And I know that IMF has said before that Senegal debt was stable even though it was high. I am wondering if that is the figure that you still consider sustainable. And then also with regards on talks of a new IMF program, I am wondering if Senegal could be asked to reimburse previous dispersion under this reporting period. 

    QUESTIONER: Still on Senegal, as soon as the report from the Audit Supreme Court was released, we saw rating agency downgrading Senegal sovereign notes. So, the country is now stuck. It cannot raise funds from the internal market, and it cannot go in a very comfortable position in international markets while they still face a lot of challenges. So, I am wondering why the IMF is working fast and bold to find a solution for Senegal in the midterm or even long-term. Is there any situation where IMF can provide a short-term, I mean, short-term relief to the country so they can go through these hard moments in a very soft way? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, on Senegal, what I can say is that we are actively engaged in discussions with the authorities with respect to the Court of Auditors Report and the associated misreporting under the IMF program. The Court of Auditors Report was released on February 12th. The Court confirmed that the fiscal deficit and debt were under reported during the period of 2019 to 2023.

    So, what we are doing is working closely with the authorities in their efforts to preserve fiscal and debt sustainability. We are working actively to advance on our discussions following the publication of the report, and we are also working with the authorities on measures to correct and remedy the misreporting that took place. What I can add is that the resolution of the misreporting in line with IMF policy is a precondition for discussions of any future financial assistance by the IMF.

    And with respect to potential consequences, I can say that the IMF does not impose any sanctions for misreporting cases. It is up to our Executive Board to decide on the next steps. And those next steps, you know, could include a waiver. And that waiver could — it could also include; it could be a waiver without a request for reimbursement. So, all of those discussions on Senegal are now underway. We are actively, very much working with the authorities, supporting as much as possible their efforts on fiscal and debt sustainability, as I said. And we will come back and report back when we have more information on Senegal. 

    I have a question here online that I am going to read. It came from the Press Center on Thailand. And the question is – ‘The upcoming World Bank IMF Annual Meetings in Thailand will bring significant attention to Southeast Asia’s economic outlook. From the from IMF’s perspective, how can Thailand best leverage this opportunity to address regional challenges such as digital transformation, climate change adaptation, and income inequality? And what collaborative initiatives between the IMF and Thailand are being planned to ensure lasting economic benefits for the country beyond the meetings themselves?’ 

    So, on this very important question, a very nice question, actually, what I can say is that we are very much looking forward to having Thailand host the annual meetings in 2026. So, this will be in October of 2026. Every three years, we do our Annual Meetings abroad. 2026, October will be Thailand. So, mark your calendar. I can also add that preparations are underway. The Fund, the IMF staff are working hand in hand with the Thai authorities to make this a highly successful event and showcasing the significant strides that Thailand has made since it last hosted our annual meetings in 1991. So, it will be 25 years when we get to 2026. 

    The Managing Director recently met with Bank of Thailand’s Governor Sethaput at the AlUla Conference in Saudi Arabia. They discussed the preparations for the annual meetings and agreed that it would be a very good opportunity to showcase on the global stage the region’s dynamism and economic activities. And of course, the meetings will also allow Thailand to position itself as a key contributor to the international economic dialogue and to gather views and experiences from countries throughout the membership of the IMF and the World Bank. 

    This ongoing close relationship leading up to and beyond, we hope, the Annual Meetings will focus on prioritizing reform reforms that are necessary to ensure the lasting benefits for Thailand and building the relationships and the shared policy, dialogue and experiences we hope will deepen our engagement, our excellent engagement and relationship with Thailand and will be sustained even past the Annual Meetings in 2026.

    QUESTIONER: My question is, what are the IMF growth projections for Jordan amid the ongoing impact of the Gaza war? And when will the Third Review under the EFF begin? And are any adjustments expected to the war’s region effect on Jordan’s economy? 

    MS. KOZACK: So, what I can share on Jordan is that the Executive Board on December 12th completed the Article IV Consultation with Jordan and the Second Review under the EFF arrangement. The mission for the next review, which will be the Third Review, is expected to take place in April.

    What I can also say is that Jordan has demonstrated resilience and maintained macroeconomic stability throughout the prolonged regional conflict. This resilience reflects the authority’s continued implementation of sound macroeconomic policies and progress with reforms. While recent developments in the region, particularly the ceasefire agreements, give rise to some cautious optimism, uncertainty, of course, in Jordan does remain high. And with respect to the growth projections, what I can say is that growth in 2024 was 2.3 percent. We are projecting growth at 2.5 percent in 2025 and a further increase in growth in 2026 to 3 percent. But like in all countries, we will be updating these projections as both part of our April World Economic Outlook Global Forecast, and also, of course, the team will be doing a full assessment of the Jordanian economy as part of their mission in April 

    And so, with this, I’m going to bring this press briefing to a close. Thank you all very much. Thank you very much for participating today. As a reminder, the briefing is embargoed until 11 a.m. Eastern Time in the U.S. The transcript, as always, will be made available later today on IMF.org. And in case of clarifications or additional questions, please reach out to my colleagues at media@IMF.org. And I wish everyone a wonderful day, and I look forward to seeing you next time. Thank you very much. 

     

    * * * * *

     

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Boris Balabanov

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/03/06/tr030625-transcript-of-com-regular-press-briefing

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Federal rules add electricity costs and increase unreliability

    Source: Government of Canada regional news

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Employee at Multinational DVD Company Charged with Stealing, Selling Pre-Release Commercial DVDs for Blockbuster Films

    Source: US Justice – Antitrust Division

    Headline: Employee at Multinational DVD Company Charged with Stealing, Selling Pre-Release Commercial DVDs for Blockbuster Films

    A worker at a DVD and Blu-ray manufacturing and distribution company used by major movie studios was arrested today in Memphis, Tennessee, for allegedly stealing DVDs and Blu-rays of blockbuster movies from the company and selling them before their official scheduled release dates. A digital copy of at least one of the stolen Blu-rays was illegally distributed tens of millions of times over the internet, causing the copyright owner tens of millions of dollars in losses.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ernst Exposes Concerning Ties to China in Critical Defense Program

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)
    WASHINGTON – During a Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship hearing, Chair Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) demonstrated why it is critical to pass her INNOVATE Act to strengthen due diligence of foreign ties for recipients of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs.
    During the hearing, Ernst exposed how inconsistent vetting standards within the programs have allowed companies with ties to China to receive hundreds of millions of tax dollars for critical defense research, including the company of one of the witnesses testifying before the committee.
    Click here to watch Chair Ernst’s questioning.
    Ernst questioned Triton Systems Executive Vice President Dr. Ken Mahmud on concerning ties between his company’s chief executive officer and a Chinese Communist Party-backed investment firm, CITIC Capital Acquisition Corp. These ties are especially concerning because Triton has received more than 900 SBIR awards amounting to more than $350 million. Mahmud acknowledged China’s ties to Triton but failed to address concerns that taxpayer-funded technology, including sensitive intellectual property, ended up benefitting China.
    Ernst’s INNOVATE Act would address this by closing loopholes and strengthening the due diligence assessment of foreign risks to prevent malign foreign actors from stealing innovation that is critical to national security. It would also require agencies to claw back awards if taxpayer-funded intellectual property is exposed to America’s foreign adversaries.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cramer, Hassan, Gillibrand, Collins Introduce Legislation to Strengthen Northern Border Security

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – The United States and Canada share the longest international border in the world, spanning 5,525 miles. The two countries are also economically tied, fostering nearly $1 trillion in bilateral trade. To ensure secure and efficient operation of the shared border, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is tasked with updating the Northern Border Threat Analysis every three years and the Northern Border Strategy every five years to safeguard it. 
    The last Northern Border Threat Analysis was completed in 2017 and has not been updated since. 
    U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND), co-chair of the Senate American-Canadian Economy and Security (ACES) Caucus, joined U.S. Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) in introducing the Northern Border Security Enhancement and Review Act. Specifically, the legislation strengthens DHS efforts to monitor and manage northern border threats by requiring an updated Northern Border Threat Analysis every three years and an updated Northern Border Strategy every five years. The analysis must also include an assessment of changes in apprehensions at the northern border, including sector-level reviews. 
    Additionally, the bill directs DHS to implement a U.S. Government Accountability Office recommendation by requiring the development of performance measures within 180 days to assess U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Air and Marine Operations effectiveness in securing the northern border. 
    “With the United States and Canada sharing the world’s longest border, our economic and national security interests are intertwined,” said Cramer. “National security threats are not restricted to the southern border so a comprehensive approach is necessary. I joined Senator Hassan in introducing the Northern Border Security Enhancement and Review Act to ensure the dependability and safety of our shared border for the families and communities who live on both sides of the border.”
    “Strengthening security of our Northern border is vital to keeping both New Hampshire and our country safe,” said Hassan. “This bipartisan legislation will require regular assessments of our Northern border security to prevent criminal activity. I will continue to work closely with law enforcement officials at our Northern border to provide them with the tools and resources that they need to combat these evolving threats and keep our communities safe.” 
    “Customs and Border Protection agents have struggled to address a dramatic increase in the number of unauthorized crossings at our northern border,” said Gillibrand. “This bill is a commonsense, bipartisan measure to give federal law enforcement and congressional leaders more data and strategic direction to address the situation, which will help protect our national security. I am proud to cosponsor this bill, and I look forward to working across the aisle to get it passed.”
    “Our border security policies must address the unique challenges along the U.S.-Canada border, where vast, remote areas make enforcement difficult,” said Collins. “By improving data collection and oversight of threats and enforcement efforts, this bipartisan bill would strengthen security, improve coordination, and help to ensure we have the resources needed to protect our northern border effectively.”
    Click here for bill text.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cramer, Coons Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Increase Affordable Housing

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Recent declines in the number of landlords participating in the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, also known as Section 8 vouchers, have made it more difficult for renters to find housing.  
    U.S. Senators Kevin Cramer, member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Development, and Chris Coons (D-DE), introduced their Choice in Affordable Housing Act today to help expand the HCV program. U.S. Representatives Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO-05) and Mike Lawler (R-NY-17) introduced the bill in the House of Representatives.
    The bill includes funding to create the Herschel Lashkowitz Housing Partnership Fund, named after the former state senator, Fargo mayor, and affordable housing advocate, Herschel Lashkowitz. It will improve the federal government’s largest rental assistance program by attracting and retaining participating landlords. Additionally, it increases funding to the Tribal Department of Housing and Urban Development Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program, uses neighborhood-specific data to set rents fairly, reduces inspection delays, and refocuses HUD’s evaluation of housing agencies. Together, these changes reduce barriers to low-income housing. 
    “Increases in housing costs mean millions of renters struggle to find affordable places to live,” said Cramer. “The success of the Housing Choice Voucher program is contingent on landlords providing adequate housing options. Herschel Lashkowitz’s legacy of affordable housing advocacy lives on through this commonsense bill by boosting the supply of options for renters to use their vouchers.”
    “As County Executive and County Council President, I saw firsthand the life-changing impact that a safe, affordable home had for Delawareans families,” said Coons. “Families in the first state and across the nation need better options when they are looking for a home, and landlords need support to be able to bring their properties into the Section 8 market. This bill is a huge step forward towards those goals so more Americans in every corner of our country can feel at home.”
    This bill is endorsed by National Affordable Housing Management Association, National Low Income Housing Coalition, National Housing Law Project, Habitat for Humanity International, National Association of Realtors, National Association of Home Builders, Enterprise Community Partners, National Association of Residential Property Managers, National Leased Housing Association, Institute of Real Estate Management, National Rental Home Council, the Poverty & Race Research Action Council, RESULTS Education Fund, the Bipartisan Policy Center, the National Multifamily Housing Council, the National Apartment Association, the Council for Affordable and Rural Housing, and the Building Owners and Managers Association.
    Cosponsors of the bill include U.S. Senators John Curtis (R-UT), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Tina Smith (D-MN), Raphael Warnock (D-GA).
    Click here for bill text.

    MIL OSI USA News –