Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amelia Scott, Honorary Affiliate and Clinical Psychologist at the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, and Macquarie University Research Fellow, Macquarie University
If you spend any time in the wellness corners of TikTok or Instagram, you’ll see claims women need one to two hours more sleep than men.
But what does the research actually say? And how does this relate to what’s going on in real life?
As we’ll see, who gets to sleep, and for how long, is a complex mix of biology, psychology and societal expectations. It also depends on how you measure sleep.
What does the evidence say?
Researchers usually measure sleep in two ways:
by asking people how much they sleep (known as self-reporting). But people are surprisingly inaccurate at estimating how much sleep they get
using objective tools, such as research-grade, wearable sleep trackers or the gold-standard polysomnography, which records brain waves, breathing and movement while you sleep during a sleep study in a lab or clinic.
Looking at the objective data, well-conducted studies usually show women sleep about 20 minutes more than men.
One global study of nearly 70,000 people who wore wearable sleep trackers found a consistent, small difference between men and women across age groups. For example, the sleep difference between men and women aged 40–44 was about 23–29 minutes.
Another large study using polysomnography found women slept about 19 minutes longer than men. In this study, women also spent more time in deep sleep: about 23% of the night compared to about 14% for men. The study also found only men’s quality of sleep declined with age.
The key caveat to these findings is that our individual sleep needs vary considerably. Women may sleep slightly more on average, just as they are slightly shorter on average. But there is no one-size-fits-all sleep duration, just as there is no universal height.
Suggesting every woman needs 20 extra minutes (let alone two hours) misses the point. It’s the same as insisting all women should be shorter than all men.
Even though women tend to sleep a little longer and deeper, they consistently report poorer sleep quality. They’re also about 40% more likely to be diagnosed with insomnia.
This mismatch between lab findings and the real world is a well-known puzzle in sleep research, and there are many reasons for it.
For instance, many research studies don’t consider mental health problems, medications, alcohol use and hormonal fluctuations. This filters out the very factors that shape sleep in the real world.
This mismatch between the lab and the bedroom also reminds us sleep doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Women’s sleep is shaped by a complex mix of biological, psychological and social factors, and this complexity is hard to capture in individual studies.
Let’s start with biology
Sleep problems begin to diverge between the sexes around puberty. They spike again during pregnancy, after birth and during perimenopause.
Fluctuating levels of ovarian hormones, particularly oestrogen and progesterone, seem to explain some of these sex differences in sleep.
For example, many girls and women report poorer sleep during the premenstrual phase just before their periods, when oestrogen and progesterone begin to fall.
Perhaps the most well-documented hormonal influence on our sleep is the decline in oestrogen during perimenopause. This is linked to increased sleep disturbances, particularly waking at 3am and struggling to get back to sleep.
Caregiving and emotional labour still fall disproportionately on women. Government data released this year suggests Australian women perform an average nine more hours of unpaid care and work each week than men.
While many women manage to put enough time aside for sleep, their opportunities for daytime rest are often scarce. This puts a lot of pressure on sleep to deliver all the restoration women need.
In my work with patients, we often untangle the threads woven into their experience of fatigue. While poor sleep is the obvious culprit, fatigue can also signal something deeper, such as underlying health issues, emotional strain, or too-high expectations of themselves. Sleep is certainly part of the picture, but it’s rarely the whole story.
For instance, rates of iron deficiency (which we know is more common in women and linked to sleep problems) are also higher in the reproductive years. This is just as many women are raising children and grappling with the “juggle” and the “mental load”.
Women in perimenopause are often navigating full-time work, teenagers, ageing parents and 3am hot flashes. These women may have adequate or even high-quality sleep (according to objective measures), but that doesn’t mean they wake feeling restored.
Most existing research also ignores gender-diverse populations. This limits our understanding of how sleep is shaped not just by biology, but by things such as identity and social context.
So where does this leave us?
While women sleep longer and better in the lab, they face more barriers to feeling rested in everyday life.
So, do women need more sleep than men? On average, yes, a little. But more importantly, women need more support and opportunity to recharge and recover across the day, and at night.
Amelia Scott is a member of the psychology education subcommittee of the Australasian Sleep Association. She receives funding from Macquarie University.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amelia Scott, Honorary Affiliate and Clinical Psychologist at the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, and Macquarie University Research Fellow, Macquarie University
If you spend any time in the wellness corners of TikTok or Instagram, you’ll see claims women need one to two hours more sleep than men.
But what does the research actually say? And how does this relate to what’s going on in real life?
As we’ll see, who gets to sleep, and for how long, is a complex mix of biology, psychology and societal expectations. It also depends on how you measure sleep.
What does the evidence say?
Researchers usually measure sleep in two ways:
by asking people how much they sleep (known as self-reporting). But people are surprisingly inaccurate at estimating how much sleep they get
using objective tools, such as research-grade, wearable sleep trackers or the gold-standard polysomnography, which records brain waves, breathing and movement while you sleep during a sleep study in a lab or clinic.
Looking at the objective data, well-conducted studies usually show women sleep about 20 minutes more than men.
One global study of nearly 70,000 people who wore wearable sleep trackers found a consistent, small difference between men and women across age groups. For example, the sleep difference between men and women aged 40–44 was about 23–29 minutes.
Another large study using polysomnography found women slept about 19 minutes longer than men. In this study, women also spent more time in deep sleep: about 23% of the night compared to about 14% for men. The study also found only men’s quality of sleep declined with age.
The key caveat to these findings is that our individual sleep needs vary considerably. Women may sleep slightly more on average, just as they are slightly shorter on average. But there is no one-size-fits-all sleep duration, just as there is no universal height.
Suggesting every woman needs 20 extra minutes (let alone two hours) misses the point. It’s the same as insisting all women should be shorter than all men.
Even though women tend to sleep a little longer and deeper, they consistently report poorer sleep quality. They’re also about 40% more likely to be diagnosed with insomnia.
This mismatch between lab findings and the real world is a well-known puzzle in sleep research, and there are many reasons for it.
For instance, many research studies don’t consider mental health problems, medications, alcohol use and hormonal fluctuations. This filters out the very factors that shape sleep in the real world.
This mismatch between the lab and the bedroom also reminds us sleep doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Women’s sleep is shaped by a complex mix of biological, psychological and social factors, and this complexity is hard to capture in individual studies.
Let’s start with biology
Sleep problems begin to diverge between the sexes around puberty. They spike again during pregnancy, after birth and during perimenopause.
Fluctuating levels of ovarian hormones, particularly oestrogen and progesterone, seem to explain some of these sex differences in sleep.
For example, many girls and women report poorer sleep during the premenstrual phase just before their periods, when oestrogen and progesterone begin to fall.
Perhaps the most well-documented hormonal influence on our sleep is the decline in oestrogen during perimenopause. This is linked to increased sleep disturbances, particularly waking at 3am and struggling to get back to sleep.
Caregiving and emotional labour still fall disproportionately on women. Government data released this year suggests Australian women perform an average nine more hours of unpaid care and work each week than men.
While many women manage to put enough time aside for sleep, their opportunities for daytime rest are often scarce. This puts a lot of pressure on sleep to deliver all the restoration women need.
In my work with patients, we often untangle the threads woven into their experience of fatigue. While poor sleep is the obvious culprit, fatigue can also signal something deeper, such as underlying health issues, emotional strain, or too-high expectations of themselves. Sleep is certainly part of the picture, but it’s rarely the whole story.
For instance, rates of iron deficiency (which we know is more common in women and linked to sleep problems) are also higher in the reproductive years. This is just as many women are raising children and grappling with the “juggle” and the “mental load”.
Women in perimenopause are often navigating full-time work, teenagers, ageing parents and 3am hot flashes. These women may have adequate or even high-quality sleep (according to objective measures), but that doesn’t mean they wake feeling restored.
Most existing research also ignores gender-diverse populations. This limits our understanding of how sleep is shaped not just by biology, but by things such as identity and social context.
So where does this leave us?
While women sleep longer and better in the lab, they face more barriers to feeling rested in everyday life.
So, do women need more sleep than men? On average, yes, a little. But more importantly, women need more support and opportunity to recharge and recover across the day, and at night.
Amelia Scott is a member of the psychology education subcommittee of the Australasian Sleep Association. She receives funding from Macquarie University.
Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development
The ACCC will not oppose the proposed acquisition of The Interpublic Group of Companies Inc by Omnicom Group Inc.
Omnicom and Interpublic are both large multinational suppliers of advertising, media and communications services, including media buying and marketing services.
In Australia, Omnicom’s key brands include DDB, TBWA, OMD Worldwide, PHD Media, Clemenger Group and Hearts & Science. Interpublic’s key brands in Australia include IPG Mediabrands, Universal McCann (UM), Initiative, 303 MullenLowe and Octagon.
The ACCC considers that the proposed acquisition would be unlikely to substantially lessen competition in the supply of media buying services and marketing and communications services.
“Our investigation found that while the proposed acquisition would result in an increase in the parties’ combined market share, other suppliers of media buying and marketing and communications services would continue to effectively compete with Omnicom after the acquisition,” ACCC Commissioner Dr Philip Williams said.
The ACCC found that the remaining advertising, media and communications conglomerates, including WPP, Publicis and Dentsu, will continue to compete with Omnicom after the acquisition, as well as smaller independent providers of these services.
In considering the proposed acquisition, the ACCC applies the legal test set out in section 50 of the Competition and Consumer Act.
In general terms, section 50 prohibits acquisitions that would have the effect, or be likely to have the effect, of substantially lessening competition in any market.
Universal McCann, a part of the Interpublic Group, is the exclusive provider of media buying services for all Australian Government departments, including the ACCC. The contractual relationship is managed by the Department of Finance.
Background
Omnicom Group Inc. and The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc are both US-based holding companies of advertising, marketing and communication services. Both companies are listed on the NYSE.
Media buying services involve the planning and purchasing of advertising space from media owners across various media types, including digital platforms and more traditional media advertising, such as television, radio, print, and outdoor platforms (billboards, public transit, etc), on behalf of advertisers.
Marketing and communications services include the creation of advertising material and determining what and how advertising is communicated. Marketing and communication services include design, consumer insights, consultancy, public relations, direct marketing, event management, brand identity and customer relationship management. Providers may offer the entire range of marketing and communication services, or they may specialise in a specific type of marketing or creative service.
SALT LAKE CITY, Utah – A federal grand jury in Salt Lake City returned an indictment today charging a Northeastern Utah man with first degree murder after he allegedly killed another man with a bow and arrow last month.
Leroy Casper Poowegup Reed, 42, of Whiterocks, Utah, was charged by complaint on June 27, 2025, and ordered detained by a U.S. Magistrate Judge.
According to court documents, on June 26, 2025, officers from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Uintah County Sheriff’s Office responded to a 911 call from an individual who reported a possible vehicle accident in the Whiterocks community. It was reported that an individual was inside the vehicle unconscious and not breathing, with an arrow sticking out of him. Officers at the scene observed a black GMC pickup with the sole occupant/victim inside. The victim had an arrow pierced into his neck just above the collar bone. Officers concluded he was deceased.
As alleged in court documents, officers located a male individual on a porch of a residence, who was yelling at law enforcement. Officers also found blood on the road in front of the residence. The resident on the porch was identified as Reed and was taken into custody. Officers also located and seized a bow and arrows, and other items. Law enforcement obtained surveillance video of the incident, which showed a black GMC truck pull up and park. The victim exited the truck and walked towards Reed’s residence. Reed was then observed walking across the driveway with a bow and arrow drawn. The victim put his hands up and the video showed Reed move closer to the victim and then release an arrow, which hit the victim in the neck above the collar bone. The victim turned and walked back to his truck and Reed turned and walked towards his residence. The arrows seized from Reed’s residence match the arrow found in the victim.
Reed is charged with murder in the first degree while within Indian Country. His initial appearance on the indictment is scheduled for July 17, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. in courtroom 8.4 before a U.S. Magistrate Judge at the Orrin G. Hatch United States District Courthouse in downtown Salt Lake City.
Acting United States Attorney Felice John Viti for the District of Utah made the announcement.
The case is being investigated jointly by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Uintah County Sheriff’s Office and the FBI Salt Lake City Field Office’s Vernal Resident Agency.
Assistant United States Attorneys Sam Pead and Victoria K. McFarland of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Utah are prosecuting the case.
This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) and Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN).
An indictment is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
How will the ATO be addressing some of the big challenges in 2025–26?
Prevention is always better than the cure. It’s never been more important for you, as an employer, to stay on top of reporting, lodgment and payment deadlines to avoid extra paperwork, charges and penalties.
‘Good payroll governance’ may sound boring, but it’s the foundation of a well-run business, and needs to be appropriate for your entity’s structure, size, complexity and industry.
Prioritise getting your tax and super obligations right, and you won’t get caught up in costly and time-consuming errors down the track.
We have a comprehensive data-matching and risk identification process to identify where we think businesses are non-compliant with their obligations. We do try and encourage businesses to meet their obligations, and we see most businesses, after receiving a nudge, act quickly to rectify their mistakes. However, businesses that fail to act after receiving a reminder can face review or audit activity. While we’re here to help, for those employers who don’t get it right – and make deliberate choices to avoid tax and super obligations – we’ll take action.
What are the biggest changes since you started in this role?
Over the past 2 years we’ve been heavily investing in understanding the complexity of those businesses who employ staff. With nearly one million employers ranging from small businesses to large corporations, we know a ‘one size fits all’ ATO approach doesn’t work.
By better understanding what employers need from the ATO, we’ve been able to fine tune our communications and compliance work. Some businesses may just need a nudge to comply, but others need firmer action.
What should employers do to kick off the new financial year?
I know how crunched for time people are, and that paying tax and super isn’t one of the fun things about running your own show, but it’s the critical part of your business.
The overwhelming majority of businesses that end up in our audit program reached that point after falling behind with tax and super payments. Successful businesses invest time and effort in payroll governance and managing their cashflow, so check out our Cash Flow Tips.
If you’ve been in business for a while, do a stocktake of how you’re complying with your tax and super obligations:
Is your software system up to date?
Are you on track with your lodgments and payments?
Are you allocating employee transactions correctly in your software?
Do you tag employee benefits so you can calculate your fringe benefits?
Do you need to check in with your registered agent?
We get a large number of voluntary disclosures each year that are the result of a new person coming in and looking at the payroll and finding errors.
If you’re about to start a new business and will be employing staff, check out the range of information we have on ato.gov. For example, employers on the smaller side of the business world can find useful tips in our Essentials to strengthen your small businessExternal Link to avoid common mistakes across the lifecycle from start-up to winding down. Our information is designed to help employers get it right from the beginning.
What are you personally looking forward to this financial year?
I’m really excited about identifying different and innovative ways we can support businesses to stay on track.
We’re continuing to pilot new strategies and trial treatments, such as contacting businesses earlier to help them understand their obligations or correct common errors early to prevent a minor issue growing into a major headache.
Another really exciting approach has been to contact tax agents about their employer clients who may not have met their FBT obligations. This two-way engagement supports tax agents to have the information they need to have the right conversations with their clients.
I often hear about people looking for ways to avoid the ‘tax man’, but it’s important people realise that the tax they pay goes to support the community, schools, hospitals and roads. So, those not paying what they should are negatively impacting the services that make Australia such a great place to live.
Keep up to date
We have tailored communication channels for medium, large and multinational businesses, to keep you up to date with updates and changes you need to know.
email notifications about new and updated information on our website – you can choose to receive updates relevant to your situation. Choose the ‘Business and organisations’ category to ensure your subscription includes notifications for more Business bulletins newsroom articles like this one.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Dahlen, Professor of Midwifery, Associate Dean Research and HDR, Midwifery Discipline Leader, Western Sydney University
A study published this week in the international obstetrics and gynaecology journal BJOG has raised concerns among women due to give birth in Australia’s public hospitals.
The study compared the outcomes of mothers and babies, as well as the costs, of standard public maternity care versus private obstetric-led care from 2016 to 2019 in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland.
It found women who gave birth in the public system were more likely to haemorrhage, sustain a third or fourth degree tear, and were less likely to have a caesarean than those who birthed in the private system. It found their babies were more likely to be deprived of oxygen, to be admitted to intensive care and to die.
But the study and subsequent media reports don’t tell the whole story. There are also several reasons to be cautious about this data.
And it’s important to keep in mind that while things sometimes go wrong during childbirth, the majority of women who give birth in Australia do so safely.
Birth options in Australia
Australia has a two-tiered system of health care:
a publicly funded system that provides care for free, or limited out-of-pocket costs, to patients in public hospitals
a private system where patients with private health insurance access care from doctors mainly in private hospitals. They face varying out-of-pocket costs.
There are multiple models of maternity care in Australia, but these can be grouped into:
fragmented care models, where women see many different care providers. Fragmented models include medical and midwifery care, and GP shared care (shared between GPs, obstetricians and midwives)
continuity of care models where one (or a small number of providers) provide the majority of the care throughout the antenatal, birth and postnatal period. This includes continuity of midwifery care in the public system, private obstetric care, or care from a privately practising midwife in the private system.
Women favour continuity of care and they and their babies experience better outcomes in these models, especially under midwifery continuity of care.
However, continuity of midwifery care can be difficult to access, despite calls to expand this model worldwide.
Digging into the data
The BJOG paper examined the outcomes for 368,292 births selected out of a bigger data set of 867,334 women who gave birth in NSW, Queensland and Victoria between January 2016 and December 2019.
It used publicly available data collected on each birth in three states in Australia, as well as Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) data linked to these cases to help examine cost.
The study grouped all the models of care together in the public system and compared them to one model of private obstetric care (excluding the privately practising midwifery model altogether).
A major problem with doing research with big data sets is they do not contain the many medical and social complexities that inform health outcomes. These complexities are much more prevalent in the public system and impact on health outcomes.
Only diabetes and blood pressure problems were included in medical complications controlled for in this paper.
But there are others that impact on outcomes. There was no controlling for drug and alcohol use, mental health, refugee status and many more significant factors impacting health outcomes for mothers and babies.
On the other hand, women who give birth in private hospitals are more likely to be socially advantaged (with higher incomes, more education, and greater access to health care, transport and safe housing), which also impacts on birth outcomes.
While the researchers attempted to “match” the population groups to be as similar as possible and reduce these differences, some of the variables were not included in the data sets. Data on artificial reproductive technology, body mass index and smoking, for example, were not available in all three states. These variables impact outcomes.
The study did not consider some key outcomes often used to measure maternity care, such as rates of episiotomies (surgical cuts to the perineum). Rates of episiotomies are higher in the private sector.
The findings of the study also differ from other research on some measurements, such as third and fourth degree perineal tears. The BJOG paper reports severe perineal tearing is lower in private hospitals, while other earlier research shows the opposite.
Severe perineal tearing does, however, occur more often among some ethnic groups who are more likely to have public health care.
More c-sections
The study found women in private hospitals were more likely to have a caesarean section (47.9%) than in the public system (31.6%). There were also higher rates of caesarean sections undertaken before 39 weeks in private obstetric-led care.
It was beyond the scope of the paper to examine the impacts of this on children, however previous research shows early births are linked to an increased risk of developmental problems, such as poorer school performance.
While caesarean sections are generally safe, past research as found c-sections can increase risks for women’s future pregnancies and births and can have long-term impacts on children’s health.
It’s important that women have a choice in how they give birth, and for that choice to be informed and supported. Australian women can also be reassured that Australia is one of the safest countries in which to give birth.
Hannah Dahlen receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council, and the Medical Research Future Fund. She is a member of the Australian College of Midwives.
Jenny Gamble receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council. She is a member of the Australian College of Midwives. She is a co-author of the BJOG study.
Armed with obscure legal jargon and fringe interpretations of the law, “sovereign citizens” are continuing to test the limits of the Australian justice system’s patience and power.
A few weeks ago, two Western Australians were jailed for 30 days after defying a Supreme Court order and refusing to acknowledge the court’s authority.
Weeks earlier, former AFL footballer Warren Tredrea told the Federal Court he could not pay his legal costs to his former employer, Channel 9, because he did not believe in Australian legal tender.
And former One Nation senator Rod Culleton is currently fighting the Australian Federal Police, arguing his court-declared bankruptcy is not legally binding and therefore should not affect his federal election nomination.
These are not isolated incidents. They are part of a growing trend known as “pseudolaw”.
What is ‘pseudolaw’?
Pseudolaw describes the practice of constructing legal arguments that sound convincing but are fundamentally wrong.
It often relies on real law or cases, twisting them through bizarre or inaccurate interpretations. It looks like law, but isn’t.
Common pseudolegal arguments include:
governments have no authority over “natural persons”
writing a legal name in all capital letters creates a separate legal entity (a “strawman”), which is not subject to state authority
money is not real and anything can be legal tender
tax laws only apply to federal entities, not individuals
“natural rights” override statutes and court-made rules.
Not one of these arguments has ever succeeded in an Australian court.
What are ‘sovereign citizens’?
Those who believe and engage in pseudolaw are sometimes termed “sovereign citizens” or “SovCits”, a label imported from the United States during the 1970s.
The sovereign citizen “movement” reached Australia in the late 1990s.
As the Australian Federal Police explain, sovereign citizens believe they are morally and legally correct, and are quite open about their beliefs and plans.
They reject government authority, refuse to comply with laws and rely on complex but false legal theories to justify their actions.
Because many social media platforms ban their content, sovereign citizens frequently communicate through encrypted messaging apps or gather in person at protests and “common law courts” – unofficial tribunals based on a distorted reading of historical legal principles. These “courts” claim to operate outside state authority and often “try” public officials, file false claims against property and carry out other pseudolegal actions with no real legal force.
They claim to be peaceful and say they are acting in “self-defence” against perceived government overreach. But a small number turn violent.
The rise of pseudolaw in Australia
In the 1970s, WA farmer Leonard Casley labelled his farm the “Hutt River Province”, then attempted to secede from the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Western Australia.
A curiosity back then, but a warning sign.
For years, fringe tax protesters and anti-government groups quietly pushed these ideas.
Then the COVID pandemic hit: lockdowns, mandates and rising distrust meant pseudolaw went more viral. Social media lit up with people claiming they weren’t subject to Australian law.
They spouted strawman theories, cited fake laws and filmed themselves refusing police orders.
It is not just noise. It is congesting the judicial system and putting people, including adherents, at risk.
A recent South Australian study highlights how pseudolaw is increasingly disrupting legal processes in that state.
The law, however, still stands, no matter what those on YouTube say.
What the ‘real’ law says
To be clear, pseudolaw looks real but isn’t; the real law is clear on many of the points raised by sovereign citizens.
For example, the federal government derives its authority to govern from the Commonwealth Constitution. This document clearly states the government has executive authority and can make laws that bind all Australians.
This includes tax laws and laws declaring Australian money as legal tender: in 2007, the Federal Court flatly rejected arguments that income tax and currency laws were invalid.
The “strawman theory” – which states someone has two personas, one of real flesh and blood and the other a separate legal personality, who is the “strawman” – has also been debunked by the courts countless times. The West Australian Supreme Court recently called it “fundamentally misguided”.
And does capitalising your name on official documents like your birth certificate or driver’s licence affect your rights? The courts have categorically said “no”.
Pseudolaw is, as one Victorian judge described it last year, nothing more than “nonsense”, “gibberish”, and “gobbledygook”.
Why sovereign citizens are a threat
While this might seem eccentric, or even harmless, pseudolaw poses real risks.
The Judicial Commission of New South Wales warns it’s not just a nuisance – it’s clogging up courts, wasting police resources and putting public officials at risk.
But the danger isn’t only to others – it is to the followers too.
It is crucial all Australians recognise that pseudolaw not only threatens your credibility but can land you in hot water under the real law.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Faisal Hai, Professor and Head of School of Civil, Mining, Environmental and Architectural Engineering, University of Wollongong
The kettle is a household staple practically everywhere – how else would we make our hot drinks?
But is it okay to re-boil water that’s already in the kettle from last time? While bringing water to a boil disinfects it, you may have heard that boiling water more than once will somehow make the water harmful and therefore you should empty the kettle each time.
Such claims are often accompanied by the argument that re-boiled water leads to the accumulation of allegedly hazardous substances including metals such as arsenic, or salts such as nitrates and fluoride.
This isn’t true. To understand why, let’s look at what is in our tap water and what really happens when we boil it.
What’s in our tap water?
Let’s take the example of tap water supplied by Sydney Water, Australia’s largest water utility which supplies water to Sydney, the Blue Mountains and the Illawarra region.
From the publicly available data for the January to March 2025 quarter for the Illawarra region, these were the average water quality results:
pH was slightly alkaline
total dissolved solids were low enough to avoid causing scaling in pipes or appliances
fluoride content was appropriate to improve dental health, and
it was “soft” water with a total hardness value below 40mg of calcium carbonate per litre.
The water contained trace amounts of metals such as iron and lead, low enough magnesium levels that it can’t be tasted, and sodium levels substantially lower than those in popular soft drinks.
These and all other monitored quality parameters were well within the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines during that period. If you were to make tea with this water, re-boiling would not cause a health problem. Here’s why.
It’s difficult to concentrate such low levels of chemicals
To concentrate substances in the water, you’d need to evaporate some of the liquid while the chemicals stay behind. Water evaporates at any temperature, but the vast majority of evaporation happens at the boiling point – when water turns into steam.
During boiling, some volatile organic compounds might escape into the air, but the amount of the inorganic compounds (such as metals and salts) remains unchanged.
While the concentration of inorganic compounds might increase as drinking water evaporates when boiled, evidence shows it doesn’t happen to such an extent that it would be hazardous.
Let’s say you boil one litre of tap water in a kettle in the morning, and your tap water has a fluoride content of 1mg per litre, which is within the limits of Australian guidelines.
You make a cup of tea taking 200ml of the boiled water. You then make another cup of tea in the afternoon by re-boiling the remaining water.
On both occasions, if heating was stopped soon after boiling started, the loss of water by evaporation would be small, and the fluoride content in each cup of tea would be similar.
But let’s assume that when making the second cup, you let the water keep boiling until 100ml of what’s in the kettle evaporates. Even then, the amount of fluoride you would consume with the second cup (0.23mg) would not be significantly higher than the fluoride you consumed with the first cup of tea (0.20mg).
The same applies to any other minerals or organics the supplied water may have contained. Let’s take lead: the water supplied in the Illawarra region as mentioned above, had a lead concentration of less than 0.0001mg per litre. To reach an unsafe lead concentration (0.01mg per litre, according to Australian guidelines) in a cup of water, you’d need to boil down roughly 20 litres of tap water to just that cup of 200ml.
Practically that is unlikely to happen – most electric kettles are designed to boil briefly before automatically shutting off. As long as the water you’re using is within the guidelines for drinking water, you can’t really concentrate it to harmful levels within your kettle.
But what about taste?
Whether re-boiled water actually affects the taste of your drinks will depend entirely on the specifics of your local water supply and your personal preferences.
The slight change in mineral concentration, or the loss of dissolved oxygen from water during boiling may affect the taste for some people – although there are a lot of other factors that contribute to the taste of your tap water.
The bottom line is that as long as the water in your kettle was originally compliant with guidelines for safe drinking water, it will remain safe and potable even after repeated boiling.
Faisal Hai does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
A new Regional University Study Hub officially opened today on King Island, bringing university closer for local residents.
Nearly half of young people in Australia have a degree but not in regional and remote Australia. On King Island, only around 22 per cent of young people have a degree.
The evidence shows that where Regional University Study Hubs are, university participation goes up.
This new Study Hub, co-located in the new King Island Community Hub, will provide support and facilities for students who are studying a university or VET course without having to leave their community.
Study King Island is part of the Albanese Government’s $66.9 million investment to more than double the number of University Study Hubs across the country.
The hub is operated by West Coast Heritage who operate the existing Study Hub West Coast with sites in Smithton and Zeehan, which has supported over 330 students since opening.
This is one of the ways the Albanese Labor Government is helping more people get a crack at going to TAFE or university, including:
cutting 20 per cent off of all student loans, wiping around $16 billion in student debt for three million Australians
fixing the indexation formula and wiping a further $3 billion in student debt, combined this will cut close to $20 billion in student debt
introducing a Commonwealth prac payment for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students
making free TAFE permanent.
For more information: Regional University Study Hubs – Department of Education, Australian Government
Quotes attributable to Minister for Education Jason Clare:
“Today, almost one in two young people have a university degree. But not everywhere. Not in the outer suburbs and not in regional Australia, or communities like King Island.
“In the years ahead more jobs will require more skills.
“The Government has set a target that by 2050, 80 per cent of workers will have a TAFE or university qualification.
“To hit that target we have to break down that invisible barrier that stops a lot of people from the bush getting a crack at going to university.
“The evidence is that where Study Hubs are, university participation goes up. That’s why we are doubling the number of Hubs across the country.”
Quotes attributable to Member for Braddon, Anne Urquhart:
“Study King Island will offer both young and mature local students the opportunity to have a dedicated study hub with support on the Island and help raise education aspirations.
“The Hub will provide support to local students studying at any Australian University or VET provider, allowing students to stay on Island and remain near their support networks while completing their studies.”
Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development
The ACCC has outlined its preliminary competition concerns with Acciona’s proposed acquisition of the East Rockingham Waste to Energy Project, which is currently in administration and receivership, in a Statement of Issues today.
Acciona owns 10 per cent of East Rockingham Project, is a creditor and is the engineering, procurement and construction contractor of the Project.
The East Rockingham Project is located in East Rockingham, Western Australia and will process residual putrescible waste for energy recovery once operational.
Acciona also owns and operates a waste-to-energy facility in Kwinana, Western Australia which will process residual waste for energy recovery.
Both the Kwinana and East Rockingham facilities offer putrescible waste disposal services to municipal and commercial and industrial customers. Once operational, the East Rockingham and Kwinana waste-to-energy facilities will be the only waste-to-energy facilities in Western Australia.
“The proposed acquisition removes competition between the only two waste-to-energy facilities in the Perth and Peel region of Western Australia,” ACCC Commissioner Dr Philip Williams said.
“Our preliminary view is that the proposed acquisition is likely to substantially lessen competition in the supply of putrescible waste disposal services in the region.”
Market feedback received by the ACCC has identified that the two facilities compete closely with each other, given their near-identical services and geographic proximity.
“We consider that East Rockingham and Kwinana waste-to-energy facilities are each other’s closest competitor. We are concerned that Acciona would be able to increase prices or reduce service quality at the East Rockingham and Kwinana waste-to-energy facilities following the proposed acquisition,” Dr Williams said.
The ACCC is considering whether the facilities’ capacity constraints and significant committed capacity may limit Acciona’s ability to increase prices or reduce service quality.
The ACCC is also continuing to examine the extent to which other putrescible waste disposal facilities, such as landfills, may constrain waste-to-energy facilities.
“We understand that establishing waste-to-energy facilities requires substantial time, money and regulatory approvals. This means that no other waste-to-energy facility is likely to become operational in Western Australia within the next decade,” Dr Williams said.
The ACCC invites submissions from interested parties in response to the Statement of Issues by 31 July 2025.
Waste-to-energy facilities receive and thermally treat residual putrescible waste (which cannot be reused or recycled and so would otherwise be disposed of at landfill) to generate electricity for wholesale energy markets.
‘Putrescible waste’ is solid waste that contains organic material capable of being decomposed by microorganisms.
Background
Acciona is a global infrastructure developer publicly listed in Spain. In Australia, Acciona has various subsidiaries and is currently developing several infrastructure projects across the transport, water and energy sectors.
Acciona holds a 10 per cent non-controlling equity interest in the East Rockingham Project, is a creditor of the Project under a loan agreement and is the current engineering, procurement and construction contractor. The East Rockingham Waste to Energy Project is located in East Rockingham, south of Perth, and is approved to process 300 kt/year of residual waste and generate 29 MW of electricity to the grid.
Acciona also owns and operates the Kwinana Waste-to-Energy facility located in the south of Perth. It is the first utility scale facility in Australia that will process residual waste for energy recovery, and is approved to process up to 460 kt/year of residual waste and generate approximately 38 MW of electricity to the grid. It is still in the commissioning process and is expected to be fully operational this year.
The East Rockingham Project and Kwinana waste-to-energy facilities overlap in the supply of putrescible waste disposal services to municipal and C&I customers in the Perth and Peel region. Once operational, they will be the first waste-to-energy facilities in Western Australia, with no other waste-to-energy facility likely to be established within the next decade.
The East Rockingham Project is currently in voluntary administration and receivers are undertaking a sale process.
Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services
The Northern Territory Police Force has arrested and charged a man with sexual offending against a child in Ludmilla last month.
On 14 June 2025, police received a report of a suspected sexual assault against a young child at a residence in Ludmilla.
Police and forensics attended and declared a crime scene.
Further investigation was able to confirm a sexual assault had occurred and on 15 July 2025, detectives from the Sex Crimes Unit, Fugitive Taskforce and general duties, arrested a 34-year-old man at a location in Yarrawonga.
The offender was not known to the victim.
He has now been charged with Sexual Intercourse with a Child under 10 and remanded to appear in Darwin Local Court today.
Detective Senior Sergeant Toby Wilson said “This has been a complex, confronting investigation that has involved a very young victim. The behaviour exhibited against this child is nothing short of horrendous.”
Members of the public who have any information about people involved in child abuse and exploitation are urged to call Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or https://crimestoppers.com.au/.
You can also make a report online by alerting the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation via the ‘Report Abuse’ button at www.accce.gov.au/report.
Youths arrested over alleged assault in Hobart CBD
Thursday, 17 July 2025 – 9:55 am.
Police have arrested two 14-year-old boys in connection with the alleged assault of a teenage boy in Hobart’s central business district on Wednesday. The incident happened about 2:05pm, on the grassed area of Mather’s Lane. It is alleged a 14-year-old boy was assaulted and had his iPhone stolen during the altercation. He was subsequently transported to the Royal Hobart Hospital for treatment of facial injuries. One of the alleged offenders was arrested on Wednesday evening and will be dealt with under the provisions of the Youth Justice Act. The second youth remains in custody and is assisting police with ongoing inquiries. Police are appealing to members of the public who may have witnessed the incident, or the events leading up to it, to come forward. A group of up to eight youths was seen leaving the area via Criterion Lane immediately following the alleged assault. Anyone with information is urged to contact Tasmania Police on 131 444 or provide information anonymously through Crime Stoppers at 1800 333 000 or online at crimestopperstas.com.au (quote Offence Report 780149).
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
China used a balanced offense to ease past New Zealand 85-51, advancing to the semifinals as the top finisher in Group A at the FIBA Women’s Asia Cup on Wednesday.
The reigning champion completed the group stage with a perfect 3-0 record and will await its semifinal opponent emerging from Japan and New Zealand, who will meet on Friday.
“As our team was just formed three months ago, we aimed to try different lineups through these group games,” China head coach Gong Luming said at a postgame news conference. “We feel that it has taken an initial shape now, but still needs fine-tuning on some details.”
“We hope that in future training, players can build better chemistry and be more familiar with our style of play, to be more creative in our play,” he added.
China took the early initiative with seven unanswered points. Amid the rousing ovation at Shenzhen Sports Center, 18-year-old Zhang Ziyu was subbed in at the 3:46 mark and wasted no time opening her account, scoring a layup eight seconds into her appearance. A 14-2 run propelled China to a 25-10 lead at the end of the first quarter.
The host began to pull away, leading by 22 points early in the second period. The Tall Ferns tried to respond but never seriously threatened China’s advantage the rest of the way.
After an 11-0 run, the game was all but decided when China raced ahead 53-28 midway through the third quarter.
All 12 Chinese players got on the scoreboard, with Zhang and Yang Shuyu each finishing with 12 points.
“We didn’t start well in these three matches. Hopefully we can improve that in our next game,” Yang said.
“Zhang is our advantage. The opponents will deploy specific defenses against her, and we need to address that,” she added.
Earlier in the day, South Korea cruised past Indonesia 95-62 to finish second in the group with a 2-1 record.
Competing in Division A for the first time, Indonesia showed its grit against the 12-time champion, trailing just 25-22 after the first quarter.
South Korea upped its game with signature 3-pointers in the second, as Lee Myung-kwan and Shin Ji-hyun combined for three consecutive shots from long range to build a 12-point cushion.
With a 48-34 halftime lead, South Korea continued to strengthen its hold on the game. A 24-14 third quarter extended the lead to 24 points, while Indonesia could not mount a comeback.
South Korean guard Park Ji-hyun contributed a game-high 18 points along with seven assists, and Shin added 15. Kim Pierre-Louis led Indonesia with 16 points.
“We didn’t start the game very well. We had a tough first half,” South Korea coach Park Soo-ho said. “But after halftime, our players came back. The next game will be the most important, and we will prepare well for it.”
In Group B, the Philippines notched its first win with a nail-biting 73-70 victory over Lebanon. Naomi Natalie Panganiban scored 15 points, leading five Philippine players in double figures, including Jack Animam’s double-double of 14 points and 16 rebounds. Jillian Archer’s game-high 23 points were not enough for Lebanon.
“This win represents everything that we’ve been working hard on for the last 10 years or so,” Philippines coach Patrick Henry Aquino said. “We are glad to be competing, not just staying in Division A, but we still have to improve and we hope that we level up again soon.”
Gilas Pilipinas will vie for a semifinal spot against South Korea on Friday. The winner will face Australia, which advanced with three straight wins in group play.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jo McDonald, Professor, Director of Centre for Rock Art Research + Management, The University of Western Australia
Senior Ranger, Mardudunhera man Peter Cooper, oversees the Murujuga landscapeJo McDonald, CC BY-SA
On Friday, the Murujuga Cultural Landscape in northwest Western Australia was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List. We were in Paris to see Murujuga become Australia’s 21st world heritage property, but only our second property listed exclusively for its Indigenous cultural values.
Murujuga, meaning “hip bone sticking out”, is an ancient rocky landscape rising out of the Indian Ocean in northwest Australia.
Murujuga is shaped by the Lore and the presence of Ngarda-Ngarli – the collective term for the Traditional Owner groups of the coastal Pilbara – since Ngurra Nyujunggamu, when the earth was soft, the beginning of time.
Murujuga includes the Burrup Peninsula, the Dampier Archipelago’s 42 islands and the listed property covers almost 100,000 hectares of land and sea country. Across this cultural landscape are between one to two million petroglyphs – rock art – created by carving designs into rock surfaces. The petroglyphs record Ngarda Ngarli’s attachment and adaptation to a changing environment through deep time.
The UNESCO listing recognises the “outstanding universal value” of the Murujuga Cultural Landscape. This value lies in the traditional system governing it, in tangible and intangible attributes that attest to 50,000 years of Ngarda-Ngarli using and caring for the land and seascape.
The Ngarda-Ngarli have campaigned for World Heritage Listing of the Murujuga Cultural Landscape for more than 20 years.
Murujuga Board and Circle of Elders members in Sydney at the ICOMOS General Assembly, where they hosted a Symposium on the Cultural Landscape nomination. Jo McDonald, CC BY-SA
A controversial nomination
While the outstanding universal values of this place were not in question, the nomination became mired with broader climate concerns.
Industrial development began at Murujuga in the 1950s and was established before Traditional Owners had decision-making authority. The Dampier Archipelago, as well as housing petroglyphs across 42 islands, is also home to one of the largest industrial hubs in the southern hemisphere.
The recent approval for the North-West Gas Hub has elevated climate change concerns and raised questions about whether the government is serious about protecting Murujuga.
While acidic pollution has been suggested by some, our work on the monitoring program found rain and dust at the site was pH neutral, and there is no acid rain impacting on the petroglyphs.
Other criticism included that the air quality at the site is compromised by local gas production. The research found the air quality at Murujuga is “good” to “very good” by international standards. We also found average annual nitrogen dioxide levels − the emission under most scrutiny − is five times lower than World Health Organisation guidelines.
According to MRAMP research, Murujuga’s air quality is well within national standards. Nitrogen dioxide is 16 times lower than the national standard, and sulphur dioxide never exceeding 10% of the national standard.
Importantly, the research program is ongoing and will transition to monitoring led by the Ngarda-Ngarli with support and training from the scientists. And this ongoing monitoring will be part of the management regime in place to protect Murujuga as a world heritage listed site.
The MRAMP monitoring team in action at Murujuga. Ben Mullins, CC BY-SA
Ngard-Ngarli leadership
Traditional Owners and Custodians led the world heritage nomination, supported by State and Commonwealth governments.
Traditional Owners consider the listing will better protect Ngarda-Ngarli knowledge, lore and culture as expressed through the landscape and in the petroglyphs.
World heritage recognition will support Ngarda-Ngarli decision-making and ongoing management across the Murujuga Cultural Landscape.
This global recognition is a mechanism to help Ngarda-Ngarli do what they have always done: protect their culture and decide what is right for Country for future generations.
The inscription is a testament to the old people who started this quest decades ago, many of whom have not lived to celebrate this victory.
The Australian delegation on the floor of UNESCO during the inscription session. Jo McDonald, CC BY
Australia’s deep time heritage
Australia now has two places on the World Heritage List which are exclusively listed as Indigenous sites of outstanding universal value to all humanity.
The Murujuga Cultural Landscape joins on the list the southwestern Victorian site Budj Bim, one of the world’s most extensive and oldest aquaculture systems.
Murujuga Aboriginal Custodians celebrate the Word Heritage listing decision in Paris this week. Jo McDonald, CC BY
By this listing, the world has recognised the deep time creative genius and ongoing connection of Ngarda-Ngarli to the Murujuga Cultural Landscape.
This international acclaim recognises the extraordinary resilience of Australia’s First Nations peoples and should be a source of pride and celebration for all Australians.
Jo McDonald is an employee of the University of Western Australia and receives funding from the Australian Research Council.The Centre for Rock Art Research and Management receives funding for its research and training operations from Rio Tinto. Jo was a member of the World Heritage committee and contributed to the writing of the dossier.
Amy Stevens is an employee of Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation, which receives funding from the Australian Government, the WA Government and industry and was a lead author on the Murujuga Cultural Landscape World Heritage nomination.
Belinda Churnside serves as Deputy Chair. Board Directors are remunerated for their duties in accordance with community-approved sitting fees. These payments are made from MAC’s operational income.
MAC receives funding support for a range of projects from both State and Federal government departments, as well as from industry partners operating within the Burrup and Maitland Industrial Estate Agreement (BMIEA) area.
The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation provides operational and strategic support for the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Program. The Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions funds MAC’s National Park Ranger Team, while other funding bodies contribute to the Murujuga Land and Sea Unit Rangers.
All funding sources and expenditures are transparently reported in MAC’s annual financial report, which is audited each year by an independent external auditor.
Ben Mullins is the lead scientist on the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Project, which is funded by the Government of Western Australia.
Peter Hicks is the Chair of the Board of Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation (MAC). Board Directors are remunerated for their duties in accordance with community-approved sitting fees. These payments are made from MAC’s operational income.
MAC receives funding support for a range of projects from both State and Federal government departments, as well as from industry partners operating within the Burrup and Maitland Industrial Estate Agreement (BMIEA) area.
The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation provides operational and strategic support for the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Program. The Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions funds MAC’s National Park Ranger Team, while other funding bodies contribute to the Murujuga Land and Sea Unit Rangers.
All funding sources and expenditures are transparently reported in MAC’s annual financial report, which is audited each year by an independent external auditor.
Terry Bailey is a World Heritage advisor to Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation and WA Government and was lead editor and co-author of Murujuga Cultural Landscape World Heritage nomination. His appointment is funded by the WA Government.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jo McDonald, Professor, Director of Centre for Rock Art Research + Management, The University of Western Australia
Senior Ranger, Mardudunhera man Peter Cooper, oversees the Murujuga landscapeJo McDonald, CC BY-SA
On Friday, the Murujuga Cultural Landscape in northwest Western Australia was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List. We were in Paris to see Murujuga become Australia’s 21st world heritage property, but only our second property listed exclusively for its Indigenous cultural values.
Murujuga, meaning “hip bone sticking out”, is an ancient rocky landscape rising out of the Indian Ocean in northwest Australia.
Murujuga is shaped by the Lore and the presence of Ngarda-Ngarli – the collective term for the Traditional Owner groups of the coastal Pilbara – since Ngurra Nyujunggamu, when the earth was soft, the beginning of time.
Murujuga includes the Burrup Peninsula, the Dampier Archipelago’s 42 islands and the listed property covers almost 100,000 hectares of land and sea country. Across this cultural landscape are between one to two million petroglyphs – rock art – created by carving designs into rock surfaces. The petroglyphs record Ngarda Ngarli’s attachment and adaptation to a changing environment through deep time.
The UNESCO listing recognises the “outstanding universal value” of the Murujuga Cultural Landscape. This value lies in the traditional system governing it, in tangible and intangible attributes that attest to 50,000 years of Ngarda-Ngarli using and caring for the land and seascape.
The Ngarda-Ngarli have campaigned for World Heritage Listing of the Murujuga Cultural Landscape for more than 20 years.
Murujuga Board and Circle of Elders members in Sydney at the ICOMOS General Assembly, where they hosted a Symposium on the Cultural Landscape nomination. Jo McDonald, CC BY-SA
A controversial nomination
While the outstanding universal values of this place were not in question, the nomination became mired with broader climate concerns.
Industrial development began at Murujuga in the 1950s and was established before Traditional Owners had decision-making authority. The Dampier Archipelago, as well as housing petroglyphs across 42 islands, is also home to one of the largest industrial hubs in the southern hemisphere.
The recent approval for the North-West Gas Hub has elevated climate change concerns and raised questions about whether the government is serious about protecting Murujuga.
While acidic pollution has been suggested by some, our work on the monitoring program found rain and dust at the site was pH neutral, and there is no acid rain impacting on the petroglyphs.
Other criticism included that the air quality at the site is compromised by local gas production. The research found the air quality at Murujuga is “good” to “very good” by international standards. We also found average annual nitrogen dioxide levels − the emission under most scrutiny − is five times lower than World Health Organisation guidelines.
According to MRAMP research, Murujuga’s air quality is well within national standards. Nitrogen dioxide is 16 times lower than the national standard, and sulphur dioxide never exceeding 10% of the national standard.
Importantly, the research program is ongoing and will transition to monitoring led by the Ngarda-Ngarli with support and training from the scientists. And this ongoing monitoring will be part of the management regime in place to protect Murujuga as a world heritage listed site.
The MRAMP monitoring team in action at Murujuga. Ben Mullins, CC BY-SA
Ngard-Ngarli leadership
Traditional Owners and Custodians led the world heritage nomination, supported by State and Commonwealth governments.
Traditional Owners consider the listing will better protect Ngarda-Ngarli knowledge, lore and culture as expressed through the landscape and in the petroglyphs.
World heritage recognition will support Ngarda-Ngarli decision-making and ongoing management across the Murujuga Cultural Landscape.
This global recognition is a mechanism to help Ngarda-Ngarli do what they have always done: protect their culture and decide what is right for Country for future generations.
The inscription is a testament to the old people who started this quest decades ago, many of whom have not lived to celebrate this victory.
The Australian delegation on the floor of UNESCO during the inscription session. Jo McDonald, CC BY
Australia’s deep time heritage
Australia now has two places on the World Heritage List which are exclusively listed as Indigenous sites of outstanding universal value to all humanity.
The Murujuga Cultural Landscape joins on the list the southwestern Victorian site Budj Bim, one of the world’s most extensive and oldest aquaculture systems.
Murujuga Aboriginal Custodians celebrate the Word Heritage listing decision in Paris this week. Jo McDonald, CC BY
By this listing, the world has recognised the deep time creative genius and ongoing connection of Ngarda-Ngarli to the Murujuga Cultural Landscape.
This international acclaim recognises the extraordinary resilience of Australia’s First Nations peoples and should be a source of pride and celebration for all Australians.
Jo McDonald is an employee of the University of Western Australia and receives funding from the Australian Research Council.The Centre for Rock Art Research and Management receives funding for its research and training operations from Rio Tinto. Jo was a member of the World Heritage committee and contributed to the writing of the dossier.
Amy Stevens is an employee of Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation, which receives funding from the Australian Government, the WA Government and industry and was a lead author on the Murujuga Cultural Landscape World Heritage nomination.
Belinda Churnside serves as Deputy Chair. Board Directors are remunerated for their duties in accordance with community-approved sitting fees. These payments are made from MAC’s operational income.
MAC receives funding support for a range of projects from both State and Federal government departments, as well as from industry partners operating within the Burrup and Maitland Industrial Estate Agreement (BMIEA) area.
The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation provides operational and strategic support for the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Program. The Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions funds MAC’s National Park Ranger Team, while other funding bodies contribute to the Murujuga Land and Sea Unit Rangers.
All funding sources and expenditures are transparently reported in MAC’s annual financial report, which is audited each year by an independent external auditor.
Ben Mullins is the lead scientist on the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Project, which is funded by the Government of Western Australia.
Peter Hicks is the Chair of the Board of Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation (MAC). Board Directors are remunerated for their duties in accordance with community-approved sitting fees. These payments are made from MAC’s operational income.
MAC receives funding support for a range of projects from both State and Federal government departments, as well as from industry partners operating within the Burrup and Maitland Industrial Estate Agreement (BMIEA) area.
The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation provides operational and strategic support for the Murujuga Rock Art Monitoring Program. The Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions funds MAC’s National Park Ranger Team, while other funding bodies contribute to the Murujuga Land and Sea Unit Rangers.
All funding sources and expenditures are transparently reported in MAC’s annual financial report, which is audited each year by an independent external auditor.
Terry Bailey is a World Heritage advisor to Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation and WA Government and was lead editor and co-author of Murujuga Cultural Landscape World Heritage nomination. His appointment is funded by the WA Government.
As millions of Australians are preparing to lodge their tax returns, scammers are actively seeking new ways to exploit personal information. If successful, they can use stolen details not only to commit fraud against the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), but also carry out broader identity theft and financial crimes across the community.
The ATO has reported a sharp rise in impersonation scams, with a 150 per cent increase over the last 12 months. 90 per cent of ATO impersonation scams are currently being sent via email.
Scammers are constantly enhancing their methods to impersonate the ATO, making it increasingly difficult for individuals to recognise fraudulent messages. Staying informed and vigilant is essential to protecting personal information.
To help keep your personal information safe and protected, the ATO’s app now has powerful new safety features designed to give users real-time control over their tax affairs through alerts and instant account locking to help stop fraudsters in their tracks.
The app enhancements bolster the ATO’s existing fraud controls that have been in place for some time to detect unusual or out of pattern behaviour on taxpayers’ accounts.
Quotes attributable to ATO Assistant Commissioner Rob Thomson
‘This is the time of year when people are awaiting their tax returns or expecting to hear from the ATO, and scammers know it.’
‘That’s why we’ve strengthened the ATO app with new security features. It’s fast, free, and puts security in your hands, giving you the power to monitor your account in real-time and instantly lock it if something doesn’t feel right.’
‘Downloading the ATO app is a simple and effective way to stay one step ahead.’
‘If you receive a notification and something doesn’t feel right, lock your account immediately in our app, and verify and report the interaction on the ATO website or by calling 1800 467 033 during business hours to discuss any suspicious activity.’
Fraudsters are getting smarter, but so are the protective features in the app. The ATO app now includes new security features designed to help you stay protected, such as:
Real-time messages when changes are made to your ATO record.
Quick account locking when you receive a real-time message to prevent unauthorised access or fraudulent refunds.
These features provide peace of mind knowing your account is protected and you remain in control of your tax affairs anytime, anywhere.
The ATO works closely with the National Anti-Scam Centre (NASC), which operates under the ACCC, to protect Australian’s identity information from scams through awareness and education that focuses on three simple steps – stop, check, protect. This partnership strengthens our ability to detect and respond to scam threats, especially during peak periods like tax time.
Quotes attributable to ACCC Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe
‘If you receive an unsolicited contact claiming to be from the ATO and offering any of these options, it’s very likely a scam. Scammers may also use spoofed phone numbers, fake caller IDs, and convincing email templates to appear legitimate.’
‘Don’t let scammers pressure you. We urge all Australians to ‘stop, check and protect’ before reacting to an unexpected call or message and keep front of mind that the ATO and myGov do not use links in their messages.’
Fraudsters and scammers plan on you being distracted and thrive on weak security. Your first line of defence is the ATO app, followed by:
Using a digital ID like myID to securely access online services. It’s unique to you and helps protect you from identity theft and fraud across platforms like tax, education, and government services.
Knowing how to spot and report scams impersonating the ATO. It only takes a few seconds to stop and check an interaction is legitimate. Remember, the ATO will never send you a link asking for your personal information or for you to log into online services.
Turning on multi-factor authentication wherever possible.
Using strong and unique passwords or passphrases.
Keeping your devices and software updated to block the latest threats.
And most importantly, never share your TFN, myGov login, or bank details even in private messages or emails. These are keys to your identity.
If you’ve received a suspicious call, SMS, email or social media message:
We’ve published a draft Practical Compliance Guideline PCG 2025/D3Global and domestic minimum tax lodgment obligations – transitional approach and an update to Taxation Ruling TR 2006/11DCPrivate Rulings for Pillar Two for public consultation until 29 August.
The draft PCG 2025/D3 covers:
Pillar Two lodgment obligations and due dates
lodgment deferrals and suspension of lodgment enforcement action
our approach to failure to lodge penalties and statement penalties during the transition period (fiscal years beginning on or before 31 December 2026 but not including a fiscal year that ends after 30 June 2028).
Consistent with Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) guidance, we’ll adopt a soft-landing approach during the transition period, allowing taxpayers to take reasonable measures to meet their obligations.
Updates to TR 2006/11DC include an:
updated reference to the provisions that are relevant to rulings, including the new Pillar Two provisions
explanation that the Commissioner may decline to rule on a private ruling application on the Australian income inclusion rule, the undertaxed profits rule, or on domestic minimum tax, if it would be unreasonable to comply with the application, including examples where this might occur.
We’re inviting comments on these drafts from:
multinational enterprise groups in Australia that may be in-scope of Pillar Two
tax and legal professionals, advisers and consultants with clients in-scope for Pillar Two.
The consultation is open until 29 August. If you represent one of the above groups, you can provide comments directly to the contact person listed on the draft PCG and TR.
We’ll be making:
further updates to TR 2006/11DC to address recent case law developments and will release another draft for consultation at that time – we’ll share progress updates through our Advice under development program
routine updates to related lodgment and penalties practice statements and taxation rulings to cover Pillar Two – these will be published when available.
Keep up to date
We have tailored communication channels for medium, large and multinational businesses, to keep you up to date with updates and changes you need to know.
email notifications about new and updated information on our website – you can choose to receive updates relevant to your situation. Choose the ‘Business and organisations’ category to ensure your subscription includes notifications for more Business bulletins newsroom articles like this one.
Victoria’s fire services are issuing a strong warning about the serious risks of smoking indoors, as it remains the leading cause of fatal house fires across the state.
Half of the 18 fatal fires in Victoria in 2024 were attributed to discarded cigarettes and smoking materials, such as lighters, matches, or open flames, while smokers remain over-represented in residential fire fatalities.
Smoking in bed is the leading cause of smoking-related fire deaths, as falling asleep with a lit cigarette in hand can easily set fire to soft materials such as bed linen.
In addition to the fire fatality figures, more than 10 per cent of residential structure fires that Fire Rescue Victoria (FRV) responded to between May 2024 and March 2025 were caused by smoking materials.
In May this year FRV also responded to two significant house fires in Melbourne within days of each other caused by cigarettes. On May 6, a brick unit in Moorabbin was destroyed by a fire originating from an incorrectly extinguished cigarette, with an elderly resident in a neighbouring property assisted to safety after their house was affected by smoke.
Just days later, another unattended cigarette was the cause of a significant fire in a Box Hill North weatherboard home.
FRV Commander Julian Bisbal, who led the response to the Moorabbin fire, said the incidents should serve as a wake-up call to the devastation unattended cigarettes can cause.
“It’s imperative you make sure your cigarette is disposed of in an area that cannot catch or spread fire. It was a ferocious, fast-moving fire because of the wind on that day.” Julian said.
“People think a cigarette is tame and safe, because it’s in your hand, but in reality, it can cause devastation. You’re holding an ignition source.”
FRV Deputy Commissioner, Community Safety, Joshua Fischer said the statistics reflected the gravity of the danger of cigarettes.
“The numbers don’t lie – cigarettes are dangerous when misused or used while drowsy, and must be handled with extreme caution,” Deputy Commissioner Fischer said.
“If you notice burn marks on a friend or family member’s carpet, furniture, clothing, or nightwear, speak up. Let them know the dangers and encourage them to take action.
“Quitting smoking is the safest option from both a health and fire safety perspective, but if that isn’t possible, firefighters recommend smoking outdoors.”
Country Fire Authority (CFA) Chief Fire Officer Jason Heffernan said smoking while affected by alcohol, drugs or medication can also increase the risk of fire.
“All it takes is a small ember from a cigarette to ignite a fire and you could be facing a life-changing event that puts yourself and others in harm’s way,” Chief Officer Heffernan said.
“We urge all smokers to properly extinguish and dispose of your cigarette in a heavy glass or metal ashtray to prevent any more major fires from occurring.
“As Victorians know, to help safeguard your family, you must have a working smoke alarm in your home. However, if smoking occurs inside your home, please have one in every room.”
Victorian fire services recommend:
If you can, smoke outside the home in a single location.
If smoking occurs in the home, there should be a smoke alarm in every room.
Never smoke in bed.
Don’t smoke when affected by alcohol, drugs or medications that may cause drowsiness.
Use heavy, high-sided, non-combustible ashtrays to dispose of cigarette butts. Pour some water on the ash and butts to make sure they’re out.
“Stick it don’t flick it” – never flick cigarette butts, either inside or outside.
Never leave a lit cigarette unattended and butt out your cigarette before you walk away.
Keep matches and cigarette lighters out of reach of children.
AUSTRAC has released its regulatory priorities for this financial year, outlining new plans to reduce the harms from money laundering, terrorism financing and other serious crime. AUSTRAC CEO Brendan Thomas said financial crime damages Australia’s financial system and this year’s focus is on preparing to regulate ‘tranche 2’ industries and targeting gaps in high-risk sectors such as cash and digital currencies.
Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services
On 15 July 2025, Detectives from the Sex Crimes Unit extradited a 70-year-old man from Sydney to Darwin.
The man failed to attend court in July 1984 in relation to sexualised offending against a young woman, resulting in a warrant being issued for his arrest. The Northern Territory Police Force have been monitoring the alleged offender for some years whilst imprisoned for unrelated offending in NSW.
He was originally charged with:
• Sexual assault • Aggravated assault • Cause bodily harm
The man appeared in Darwin Local Court yesterday and was further remanded until 30 July 2025.
Detective Senior Constable Naomi Cox says, “This arrest demonstrates that no matter how much time passes, police remain committed to pursuing justice. We never forget.”
“We continue to urge victims to reach out on triple zero in emergencies and on 131 444. You can also visit your local police station.”
SPRINGFIELD, Mo., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Great Southern Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) (NASDAQ:GSBC), the holding company for Great Southern Bank (the “Bank”), today reported that preliminary earnings for the three months ended June 30, 2025, were $1.72 per diluted common share ($19.8 million net income) compared to $1.45 per diluted common share ($17.0 million net income) for the three months ended June 30, 2024.
For the quarter ended June 30, 2025, annualized return on average common equity was 12.81%, annualized return on average assets was 1.34%, and annualized net interest margin was 3.68%, compared to 12.03%, 1.17% and 3.43%, respectively, for the quarter ended June 30, 2024.
Second Quarter 2025 Key Results:
Net Interest Income: Net interest income for the second quarter of 2025 increased $4.2 million (or approximately 8.9%) to $51.0 million compared to $46.8 million for the second quarter of 2024, largely driven by lower interest expense on deposit accounts and other borrowings. Annualized net interest margin was 3.68% for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, compared to 3.43% for the quarter ended June 30, 2024, and 3.57% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. During the quarter ended June 30, 2025, the Company recorded $434,000 of interest income related to recoveries on non-accrual loans and other cash-basis assets, positively affecting net interest income and net interest margin.
Asset Quality: Non-performing assets and potential problem loans totaled $15.3 million at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $1.3 million from $16.6 million at December 31, 2024. At June 30, 2025, non-performing assets were $8.1 million (0.14% of total assets), a decrease of $1.5 million from $9.6 million (0.16% of total assets) at December 31, 2024.
Liquidity: The Company had secured borrowing line availability at the FHLBank and Federal Reserve Bank of $1.22 billion and $338.9 million, respectively, at June 30, 2025. In addition, at June 30, 2025, the Company had unpledged securities with a market value totaling $349.3 million, which could be pledged as collateral for additional borrowing capacity at either the FHLBank or Federal Reserve Bank.
Capital: The Company’s capital position remained strong as of June 30, 2025, significantly exceeding the thresholds established by regulators. On a preliminary basis, as of June 30, 2025, the Company’s Tier 1 Leverage Ratio was 11.5%, Common Equity Tier 1 Capital Ratio was 13.0%, Tier 1 Capital Ratio was 13.5%, and Total Capital Ratio was 14.7%. The Company’s tangible common equity to tangible assets ratio was 10.5% at June 30, 2025. In June 2025, the Company redeemed at par all of its outstanding subordinated notes, which had an aggregate principal amount of $75.0 million.
Significant Item Impacting Non-Interest Income: In the quarter ended June 30, 2025, the Company recorded income of $1.1 million related to exits from, and other activities of, its investments in tax credit partnerships. This was an unusually large amount for the Company, but this type of income occurs from time to time. We cannot, however, anticipate the amount or timing of this income with certainty.
Selected Financial Data:
Three Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2025
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Net interest income
$
50,963
$
46,818
$
49,334
Provision (credit) for credit losses on loans and unfunded commitments
(110
)
(607
)
(348
)
Non-interest income
8,212
9,833
6,590
Non-interest expense
35,005
36,409
34,822
Provision for income taxes
4,494
3,861
4,290
Net income
$
19,786
$
16,988
$
17,160
Earnings per diluted common share
$
1.72
$
1.45
$
1.47
Joseph W. Turner, President and CEO of Great Southern, commented, “The second quarter was marked by continued execution of our strategy to maintain core banking fundamentals, drive earnings, and improve tangible book value per share. Our core credit and operating metrics remained sound, with solid quarterly profitability driven by steady margins, ongoing disciplined expense control, and continued strong credit quality. We reported net income of $19.8 million, or $1.72 per diluted common share, for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $17.0 million, or $1.45 per diluted common share, in the same period last year. The increase in net income compared to the prior year quarter reflects strong growth in net interest income, which rose $4.2 million, or 8.9%, largely due to lower interest expense on deposit accounts and borrowings. The second quarter of 2025 and 2024 each had significant unusual or non-recurring items included in non-interest income, which are noted elsewhere in this earnings release. Non-interest expense also decreased from the year-ago quarter due to significant legal and professional fees recorded in 2024.”
Turner noted, “Despite lingering external economic pressures, our core operations continued to perform well. Total interest income for the second quarter of 2025 was $81.0 million, reflecting stable yields on loans and investment securities. Net interest income for the quarter increased to $51.0 million, supported by our continued disciplined asset-liability management and lower deposit interest costs, despite competitive pressures. We also saw stability in our core non-time deposit balances, reflecting the strength of customer relationships and the enduring value of our franchise.”
Turner added, “Our balance sheet remains well positioned, with total assets of approximately $5.85 billion at June 30, 2025, and a loan portfolio that reflects a balanced approach to growth and risk management, as we serve our constituent markets. We emphasize prudent lending practices through our relationship-based lending resulting in strong credit quality. Given our emphasis on balancing loan growth with appropriate pricing and loan structure, we saw a $156 million net loan reduction in the quarter, which included a $30 million loan payoff at the end of the quarter. Large loan payoffs tend to fluctuate, but we did experience a higher level of such payoffs in the second quarter of 2025. Our allowance for credit losses stood at $64.8 million at June 30, 2025, representing 1.41% of total loans. Our non-performing assets decreased $1.5 million from both March 31, 2025, and December 31, 2024, to $8.1 million, or 0.14% of total assets, highlighting our prudent underwriting standards and ongoing credit monitoring.”
Turner further noted, “On the expense side, we remain focused on operating discipline. Non-interest expense totaled $35.0 million for the second quarter of 2025, an improvement of $1.4 million from the prior-year second quarter, with reductions in legal and professional fees and expense on other real estate owned, partially offset by modest increases in technology investments. Non-interest income totaled $8.2 million for the second quarter of 2025, which did include some significant unusual income as we’ve noted.”
Turner continued, “As we look ahead, our priorities remain consistent: control costs, safeguard credit quality, and optimize our funding mix to enable continued growth and long-term financial stability. At June 30, 2025, our capital and liquidity positions were solid, with a tangible common equity ratio of 10.5% and approximately $2.2 billion of secured available lines and on-balance sheet liquid assets, providing us with the capital and liquidity we need to support customers, pursue strategic growth opportunities, and continue returning value to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. In the second quarter of 2025 we repurchased nearly 176,000 shares of our common stock. In June 2025, we redeemed all of the Company’s outstanding 5.50% fixed-to-floating rate subordinated notes, with an aggregate principal balance of $75 million, in advance of a step up in rate, thereby avoiding a significant increase in interest cost.”
“Great Southern’s second-quarter 2025 results demonstrate the strength and consistency of our business model and our ability to deliver sustainable returns, supported by strong customer relationships and disciplined management. Our focus on long-term value creation is steadfast as our team works daily to meet the needs of our customers, communities and shareholders,” Turner concluded.
NET INTEREST INCOME
Three Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2025
(Dollars in thousands)
Interest Income
$
80,975
$
80,927
$
80,243
Interest Expense
30,012
34,109
30,909
Net Interest Income
$
50,963
$
46,818
$
49,334
Net interest margin
3.68
%
3.43
%
3.57
%
Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities
126.9
%
126.7
%
125.5
%
Net interest income for the second quarter of 2025 increased $4.2 million to $51.0 million, compared to $46.8 million for the second quarter of 2024. This increase in net interest income was driven primarily by higher investment interest income and improved overall yields, as well as the strategic management of maturing/repricing brokered deposits and interest-bearing demand deposits to reduce interest expense. Net interest margin was 3.68% in the second quarter of 2025, compared to 3.43% in the same period of 2024 and 3.57% in the first quarter of 2025. Compared to the 2024 second quarter, the average yield on loans decreased 11 basis points, the average yield on investment securities increased 27 basis points and the average yield on other interest earning assets decreased 101 basis points. The average rate paid on interest-bearing demand and savings deposits, time deposits and brokered deposits decreased 36 basis points, 63 basis points and 74 basis points, respectively, in the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024. The average interest rate spread was 3.09% for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 2.77% for the three months ended June 30, 2024 and 3.00% for the three months ended March 31, 2025.
Net interest margin was positively impacted by the receipt of interest income which had not been accrued for, as outlined above, under “Second Quarter 2025 Key Results – Net Interest Income.” This additional interest income contributed three basis points to net interest margin in the second quarter of 2025. While we currently believe that interest income recoveries such as this may occur in future periods, we cannot anticipate the amount or timing of this income with certainty.
The average rate paid on total interest-bearing liabilities decreased from 3.17% in the 2024 second quarter to 2.75% in the 2025 second quarter. The average rates paid on deposits and borrowings decreased compared to the prior-year second quarter as market interest rates, primarily the federal funds rate and SOFR rates, declined in the fourth quarter of 2024. Yields on the Company’s portfolio of investment securities increased compared to the prior-year second quarter due to higher-yielding securities purchased in the second quarter of 2024. While market interest rates decreased compared to the second quarter of 2024, the average yield on loans only decreased slightly as cash flows from lower-rate fixed rate loans were redeployed into loans with comparably higher rates of interest.
To mitigate exposure to the risk of fluctuations in future cash flows resulting from changes in interest rates (primarily related to falling interest rates), the Company has, from time to time, strategically utilized derivative financial instruments, primarily interest rate swaps, as part of its interest rate risk management strategy.
The following table presents, for the periods indicated, the effect of cash flow hedge accounting included in interest income in the consolidated statements of income:
Three Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2025
(In thousands)
Terminated interest rate swaps
$
2,025
$
2,025
$
2,003
Active interest rate swaps
(1,757
)
(2,769
)
(1,742
)
Increase (decrease) to interest income
$
268
$
(744
)
$
261
The Company entered into an interest rate swap in October 2018, which was terminated in March 2020. Upon termination, the Company received $45.9 million, inclusive of accrued but unpaid interest, from its swap counterparty. The net amount, after deducting accrued interest and deferred income taxes, is being accreted to interest income on loans monthly until the originally scheduled termination date of October 6, 2025. After this date, the Company will no longer have the benefit of that income from the terminated swap. The Company anticipates recording approximately $2.0 million in interest income from the terminated swap in the third quarter of 2025, after which no further interest income will be realized.
The Company’s net interest income in the second quarter of 2025 increased 8.9% compared to net interest income in the second quarter of 2024. The cost of deposits has been negatively impacted over several quarters by the high level of competition for deposits across the industry and the lingering effects of liquidity events at several banks in March and April 2023. After the second quarter of 2023, the Company had a significant amount of time deposits maturing at relatively low interest rates. These deposits were either renewed at higher rates or withdrawn, requiring the Company to replace the withdrawn deposits with other funding sources at then-current market rates. Market rates for time deposits for much of 2024 remained elevated, but have declined as the FOMC cut the federal funds rate by 100 basis points in late 2024 and signaled that further rate cuts may occur in late 2025. As of June 30, 2025, time deposit maturities over the next 12 months were as follows: within three months — $696 million, with a weighted-average rate of 3.93%; within three to six months — $460 million, with a weighted-average rate of 3.83%; and within six to twelve months — $124 million, with a weighted-average rate of 3.37%. Based on time deposit market rates in June 2025, replacement rates for these maturing time deposits are likely to be approximately 3.35-3.85%.
NON-INTEREST INCOME
For the quarter ended June 30, 2025, non-interest income decreased $1.6 million to $8.2 million when compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2024, primarily as a result of the following items:
Other income: Other income decreased $1.6 million compared to the prior-year quarter. In the second quarter of 2024, the Company recorded $2.7 million of other income, net of expenses and write-offs, related to the termination of the master agreement between the Company and a third-party software vendor for the intended conversion of the Company’s core banking platform. Separately, in the quarter ended June 30, 2025, the Company recorded income of $1.1 million related to exits from, and other activities of, its investments in tax credit partnerships.
Net gains on loan sales: Net gains on loan sales decreased $234,000 compared to the prior-year quarter. The decrease was due to a decrease in balance of fixed-rate single-family mortgage loans originated and sold during the 2025 period compared to the 2024 period. Fixed rate single-family mortgage loans originated are generally subsequently sold in the secondary market.
Late charges and fees on loans: Late charges and fees on loans increased $204,000 compared to the prior-year quarter. This increase was primarily due to prepayment fees on one large commercial real estate loan, which paid off in the 2025 quarter.
NON-INTEREST EXPENSE
For the quarter ended June 30, 2025, non-interest expense decreased $1.4 million to $35.0 million when compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2024, primarily as a result of the following items:
Legal, audit and other professional fees: Legal, audit and other professional fees decreased $935,000, or 50.2%, from the prior-year quarter, to $929,000. In the quarter ended June 30, 2024, the Company expensed a total of $902,000 related to training and implementation costs for the intended core systems conversion and professional fees to consultants engaged to support the Company’s proposed transition of core and ancillary software and information technology systems, compared to $46,000 in costs expensed in the quarter ended June 30, 2025.
Expense on other real estate owned: Expenses on other real estate owned decreased $453,000, or 158.9%, from the prior-year quarter. In the quarter ended June 30, 2025, the Company collected a total of $445,000 in rental income from other real estate owned, compared to $24,000 collected for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. The 2025 period included rental income from the $6.0 million office building asset that was added to other real estate owned in the fourth quarter of 2024. See “Asset Quality” below.
Other operating expenses: Other operating expenses decreased $444,000, or 17.3%, from the prior-year quarter. In the 2024 period, the Company recorded expenses totaling $600,000 related to the resolution of compliance matters, with no similar expenses recorded in the current-year quarter.
Net occupancy and equipment expenses: Net occupancy and equipment expenses increased $594,000, or 7.6%, from the prior-year quarter. Various components of computer license and support expenses related to upgrades of core systems capabilities collectively increased by $502,000 in the second quarter of 2025 compared to the second quarter of 2024.
The Company’s efficiency ratio for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, was 59.16% compared to 64.27% for the same quarter in 2024. The Company’s ratio of non-interest expense to average assets was 2.37% for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 2.50% for the three months ended June 30, 2024. Average assets for the three months ended June 30, 2025, increased $86.0 million, or 1.5%, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, primarily due to growth in average balances of net loans and investment securities.
INCOME TAXES
For each of the three months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, the Company’s effective tax rate was 18.5%. For the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, the Company’s effective tax rate was 19.2% and 18.8%, respectively. These effective rates were below the statutory federal tax rate of 21%, due primarily to the utilization of certain investment tax credits and the Company’s tax-exempt investments and tax-exempt loans, which reduced the Company’s effective tax rate. The Company’s effective tax rate may fluctuate in future periods as it is impacted by the level and timing of the Company’s utilization of tax credits, the level of tax-exempt investments and loans, the amount of taxable income in various state jurisdictions and the overall level of pre-tax income. State tax expense estimates continually evolve as taxable income and apportionment between states are analyzed. The Company currently expects its effective tax rate (combined federal and state) will be approximately 18.0% to 20.0% in future periods.
CAPITAL
June 30,
December 31,
March 31,
2025
2024
2025
Consolidated Regulatory Capital Ratios
(Preliminary)
Tier 1 Leverage Ratio
11.5
%
11.4
%
11.3
%
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital Ratio
13.0
%
12.3
%
12.4
%
Tier 1 Capital Ratio
13.5
%
12.8
%
12.9
%
Total Capital Ratio
14.7
%
15.4
%
15.6
%
Tangible Common Equity Ratio
10.5
%
9.9
%
10.1
%
As of June 30, 2025, total stockholders’ equity was $622.4 million, representing 10.6% of total assets and a book value of $54.61 per common share. This compares to total stockholders’ equity of $599.6 million, or 10.0% of total assets, and a book value of $51.14 per common share at December 31, 2024. The $22.8 million increase in stockholders’ equity from December 31, 2024, was primarily driven by $36.9 million in net income and a $2.0 million increase from stock option exercises, partially offset by $9.2 million in cash dividends declared on the Company’s common stock and $20.0 million in common stock repurchases.
Decreased unrealized losses on the Company’s available-for-sale investment securities and interest rate swaps, which totaled $54.4 million (net of taxes) at December 31, 2024, also increased stockholders’ equity by $13.0 million during the first six months of 2025. These net unrealized losses primarily resulted from increased intermediate-term market interest rates in prior periods, which generally decreased the fair value of the investment securities and interest rate swaps. In the first six months of 2025, these market interest rates decreased, resulting in increases in the fair value of the Company’s investment securities and interest rate swaps.
The Company had unrealized losses on its portfolio of held-to-maturity investment securities, which totaled $19.3 million and $24.7 million at June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively, that were not included in its total capital balance. If held-to-maturity unrealized losses were included in capital (net of taxes) at June 30, 2025, they would have decreased total stockholder’s equity at that date by $14.6 million. This amount was equal to 2.3% of total stockholders’ equity of $622.4 million at June 30, 2025, compared to 3.1% of total stockholders’ equity at December 31, 2024.
On June 15, 2025, the Company redeemed all of its outstanding 5.50% fixed-to-floating rate subordinated notes due June 15, 2030, with an aggregate principal balance of $75 million. The total redemption price was 100% of the aggregate principal balance of the subordinated notes plus accrued and unpaid interest. The Company utilized excess cash on hand for the redemption payment.
In November 2022, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the purchase of up to one million shares of the Company’s common stock. As of June 30, 2025, approximately 94,000 shares remained available under this stock repurchase authorization.
In April 2025, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a new stock repurchase program, which will succeed the existing repurchase program (authorized in November 2022) following the repurchase of the existing program’s remaining available shares. The new stock repurchase program authorizes the purchase, from time to time, of up to one million additional shares of the Company’s common stock.
During the three months ended June 30, 2025, the Company repurchased 175,998 shares of its common stock at an average price of $55.11, and the Company’s Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.40 per common share, which, combined, reduced stockholders’ equity by $14.4 million.
During the six months ended June 30, 2025, the Company repurchased 349,342 shares of its common stock at an average price of $56.73, and the Company’s Board of Directors declared regular quarterly cash dividends totaling $0.80 per common share, which, combined, reduced stockholders’ equity by $29.2 million.
LIQUIDITY AND DEPOSITS
Liquidity is a measure of the Company’s ability to generate sufficient cash to meet present and future financial obligations in a timely manner. The Company’s primary sources of funds are customer deposits, FHLBank advances, other borrowings, loan repayments, unpledged securities, proceeds from sales of loans and available-for-sale securities and funds provided from operations. The Company utilizes some or all of these sources of funds depending on the comparative costs and availability at the time. The Company has from time to time chosen not to pay rates on deposits as high as the rates paid by certain of its competitors and, when believed to be appropriate, supplements deposits with less expensive alternative sources of funds. Management believes that the Company maintains overall liquidity sufficient to satisfy its depositors’ requirements and meet its borrowers’ credit needs.
At June 30, 2025, the Company had the following available secured lines and on-balance sheet liquidity:
June 30, 2025
Federal Home Loan Bank line
$1,216.1 million
Federal Reserve Bank line
338.9 million
Cash and cash equivalents
245.9 million
Unpledged securities – Available-for-sale
325.3 million
Unpledged securities – Held-to-maturity
24.0 million
During the six months ended June 30, 2025, the Company’s total deposits increased $78.6 million. Interest-bearing checking balances increased $18.5 million (0.8%), primarily in certain money market accounts, and non-interest-bearing checking balances increased $17.0 million (2.0%). Time deposits generated through the Company’s banking center and corporate services networks decreased $18.1 million (2.3%). Brokered deposits increased $61.2 million (7.9%) through a variety of sources. During the three months ended June 30, 2025, the Company’s total deposits decreased $73.9 million, with $62.1 million of this decrease in brokered deposits.
At June 30, 2025, the Company had the following deposit balances:
June 30, 2025
Interest-bearing checking
$2,233.2 million
Non-interest-bearing checking
859.9 million
Time deposits
757.7 million
Brokered deposits
833.3 million
At June 30, 2025, the Company estimated that its uninsured deposits, excluding deposit accounts of the Company’s consolidated subsidiaries, were approximately $703.6 million (15% of total deposits).
LOANS
Total net loans, excluding mortgage loans held for sale, decreased $156.1 million, or 3.3%, from $4.69 billion at December 31, 2024 to $4.53 billion at June 30, 2025. This decrease was primarily driven by decreases in construction loans of $79.1 million, commercial real estate loans of $56.1 million, one- to four-family residential loans of $23.0 million and commercial business loans of $25.2 million, partially offset by an increase in other residential (multi-family) loans of $28.7 million. Compared to March 31, 2025, net loans decreased $156.4 million.
The pipeline of the unfunded portion of loans and formal loan commitments remained strong, with the largest portion of these unfunded balances represented by the unfunded portion of outstanding construction loans ($626.0 million at June 30, 2025). See the table below.
For additional details about the Company’s loan portfolio, please refer to the quarterly loan portfolio presentation available on the Company’s Investor Relations website under “Presentations.”
Loan commitments and the unfunded portion of loans at the dates indicated were as follows (in thousands):
June 30, 2025
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
December 31, 2023
December 31, 2022
Closed non-construction loans with unused available lines
Secured by real estate (one- to four-family)
$
211,453
$
211,119
$
205,599
$
203,964
$
199,182
Secured by real estate (not one- to four-family)
—
—
—
—
—
Not secured by real estate – commercial business
102,891
106,211
106,621
82,435
104,452
Closed construction loans with unused available lines
Secured by real estate (one-to four-family)
96,935
96,807
94,501
101,545
100,669
Secured by real estate (not one-to four-family)
644,427
657,828
703,947
719,039
1,444,450
Loan commitments not closed
Secured by real estate (one-to four-family)
17,148
19,264
14,373
12,347
16,819
Secured by real estate (not one-to four-family)
13,002
50,296
53,660
48,153
157,645
Not secured by real estate – commercial business
27,003
18,484
22,884
11,763
50,145
$
1,112,859
$
1,160,009
$
1,201,585
$
1,179,246
$
2,073,362
PROVISION FOR CREDIT LOSSES AND ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES
During the three months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, the Company did not record a provision expense on its portfolio of outstanding loans. During the six months ended June 30, 2025, the Company did not record a provision expense on its portfolio of outstanding loans, compared to a provision expense of $500,000 in the same period in 2024. Total net recoveries were $111,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to net recoveries of $168,000 during the same period in the prior year. Total net recoveries were $55,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to net recoveries of $85,000 during the same period in the prior year. Additionally, for the quarter ended June 30, 2025, the Company recorded a negative provision for losses on unfunded commitments of $110,000, compared to a negative provision of $607,000 for the same period in 2024. For the six months ended June 30, 2025, the Company recorded a negative provision for losses on unfunded commitments of $458,000, compared to a negative provision of $477,000 for the same period in 2024.
The Bank’s allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans was 1.41% at June 30, 2025, an increase from 1.36% at both December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025. Management considers the allowance for credit losses adequate to cover losses inherent in the Bank’s loan portfolio at June 30, 2025, based on recent reviews of the portfolio and current economic conditions. However, if challenging economic conditions persist or worsen, or if management’s assessment of the loan portfolio changes, additional provisions for credit losses may be required, which could adversely impact the Company’s future financial performance.
ASSET QUALITY
At June 30, 2025, non-performing assets were $8.1 million, a decrease of $1.5 million from $9.6 million at December 31, 2024 and a decrease of $1.4 million from $9.5 million at March 31, 2025. Non-performing assets as a percentage of total assets were 0.14% at June 30, 2025, compared to 0.16% at both December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025.
Activity in the non-performing loan categories during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, was as follows:
Beginning Balance, April 1
Additions to Non- Performing
Removed from Non- Performing
Transfers to Potential Problem Loans
Transfers to Foreclosed Assets and Repossessions
Charge- Offs
Payments
Ending Balance, June 30
(In thousands)
One- to four-family construction
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
Subdivision construction
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Land development
368
—
—
—
—
—
(368
)
—
Commercial construction
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
One- to four-family residential
3,076
154
—
—
—
—
(1,204
)
2,026
Other residential (multi-family)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Commercial real estate
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Commercial business
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Consumer
38
7
—
—
—
—
(27
)
18
Total non-performing loans
$
3,482
$
161
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
(1,599
)
$
2,044
Compared to March 31, 2025, non-performing loans decreased $1.4 million.
The non-performing one- to four-family residential category consisted of eight loans at June 30, 2025, one of which was added during the current quarter.
The largest relationship in the one- to four-family residential category totaled $614,000 at June 30, 2025. This relationship was added to non-performing loans in 2024 and is collateralized by a single-family residential property in the Sarasota, Fla. area.
During the quarter ended June 30, 2025, one- to four-family residential loans experienced one loan pay-off totaling $884,000 and another related loan had a principal pay-down totaling $296,000. Additionally, the only loan in the non-performing land development category at the beginning of the quarter paid off.
Activity in the potential problem loans categories during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, was as follows:
Beginning Balance, April 1
Additions to Potential Problem
Removed from Potential Problem
Transfers to Non- Performing
Transfers to Foreclosed Assets and Repossessions
Charge- Offs
Loan Advances (Payments)
Ending Balance, June 30
(In thousands)
One- to four-family construction
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
Subdivision construction
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Land development
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Commercial construction
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
One- to four-family residential
2,128
34
(307
)
—
—
—
(16
)
1,839
Other residential (multi-family)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Commercial real estate
4,313
—
—
—
—
—
(16
)
4,297
Commercial business
—
33
—
—
—
—
—
33
Consumer
1,011
50
—
—
(2
)
(11
)
(11
)
1,037
Total potential problem loans
$
7,452
$
117
$
(307
)
$
—
$
(2
)
$
(11
)
$
(43
)
$
7,206
Compared to March 31, 2025, potential problem loans decreased $246,000.
At June 30, 2025, the commercial real estate category consisted of three loans, all of which are part of one relationship and were added in 2024.
The commercial real estate relationship is collateralized by three nursing care facilities located in southwest Missouri. The borrower’s business cash flow was negatively impacted by a reduction in available labor and increased operating costs as well as ongoing changes to the Missouri Medicaid reimbursement rate. Monthly payments were timely made prior to the transfer to this category and have continued to be paid timely.
At June 30, 2025, the one- to four-family residential category consisted of ten loans, one of which was added to potential problem loans during the current quarter.
The largest relationship in the one- to four-family category, which was reclassified from the consumer category during the first quarter of 2025, totaled $963,000 and is collateralized by multiple single-family residential properties in Indiana and Florida.
At June 30, 2025, the consumer category of potential problem loans consisted of 14 loans, two of which were added during the current quarter.
The largest loan in the consumer category is a home equity loan totaling $784,000 related to the nursing care facility relationship, noted above.
Activity in the foreclosed assets and repossessions categories during the quarter ended June 30, 2025 was as follows:
Beginning Balance, April 1
Additions
ORE and Repossession Sales
Capitalized Costs
ORE and Repossession Write-Downs
Ending Balance, June 30
(In thousands)
One-to four-family construction
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
—
Subdivision construction
—
—
—
—
—
—
Land development
—
—
—
—
—
—
Commercial construction
—
—
—
—
—
—
One- to four-family residential
—
—
—
—
—
—
Other residential (multi-family)
—
—
—
—
—
—
Commercial real estate
6,036
—
—
—
—
6,036
Commercial business
—
—
—
—
—
—
Consumer
—
6
(2
)
—
—
4
Total foreclosed assets and repossessions
$
6,036
$
6
$
(2
)
$
—
$
—
$
6,040
Compared to March 31, 2025, foreclosed assets increased $4,000.
The commercial real estate category consisted of two foreclosed properties, one of which, totaling $76,000, was added during the first quarter of 2025.
The largest asset in the commercial real estate category, totaling $6.0 million, consisted of an office building located in Clayton, Mo. This asset was foreclosed upon in the fourth quarter of 2024.
BUSINESS INITIATIVES
Technology updates and advancements continue with the Company’s current core provider. Projects involving a full array of products and services are moving forward, with completions expected beginning in the third quarter of 2025 and continuing into 2026.
The Company installed 10 ITM units in the St. Louis, Mo. market, replacing existing end-of-life ATM units. The ITMs, all located at banking center locations, offer customers live teller services, extended banking hours, and services beyond those traditionally available via an ATM.
Construction of the Company’s new banking center at 723 N. Benton in Springfield, Mo., to replace the existing facility at that location, began in March 2025 and is on schedule for completion in the fourth quarter of 2025. The new facility, designed as a next-generation banking center, will allow for flexibility in testing new designs, processes, technology and tools, balanced with customer convenience. The Company has 11 other banking centers and an Express Center in Springfield.
Headquartered in Springfield, Missouri, Great Southern offers a broad range of banking services to customers. The Company operates 89 retail banking centers in Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Arkansas and Nebraska and commercial lending offices in Atlanta, Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Omaha, and Phoenix. The common stock of Great Southern Bancorp, Inc. is listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “GSBC.”
When used in this press release and in other documents filed or furnished by the Company with or to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), in the Company’s other press releases or other public or stockholder communications, and in oral statements made with the approval of an authorized executive officer, the words or phrases “may,” “might,” “could,” “should,” “will likely result,” “are expected to,” “will continue,” “is anticipated,” “believe,” “estimate,” “project,” “intends” or similar expressions are intended to identify “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements also include, but are not limited to, statements regarding plans, objectives, expectations or consequences of announced transactions, known trends and statements about future performance, operations, products and services of the Company. The Company’s ability to predict results or the actual effects of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain, and the Company’s actual results could differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements.
Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to: (i) expected revenues, cost savings, earnings accretion, synergies and other benefits from the Company’s merger and acquisition activities might not be realized within the anticipated time frames or at all, and costs or difficulties relating to integration matters, including but not limited to customer and employee retention, might be greater than expected; (ii) changes in economic conditions, either nationally or in the Company’s market areas; (iii) the effects of any new or continuing public health issues on general economic and financial market conditions; (iv) fluctuations in interest rates, the effects of inflation or a potential recession, whether caused by Federal Reserve actions or otherwise; (v) the impact of bank failures or adverse developments at other banks and related negative press about the banking industry in general on investor and depositor sentiment; (vi) slower or negative economic growth caused by tariffs, changes in energy prices, supply chain disruptions or other factors; (vii) the risks of lending and investing activities, including changes in the level and direction of loan delinquencies and write-offs and changes in estimates of the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses; (viii) the possibility of realized or unrealized losses on securities held in the Company’s investment portfolio; (ix) the Company’s ability to access cost-effective funding and maintain sufficient liquidity; (x) fluctuations in real estate values and both residential and commercial real estate market conditions; (xi) the ability to adapt successfully to technological changes to meet customers’ needs and developments in the marketplace; (xii) the possibility that security measures implemented might not be sufficient to mitigate the risk of a cyber-attack or cyber theft, and that such security measures might not protect against systems failures or interruptions; (xiii) legislative or regulatory changes that adversely affect the Company’s business; (xiv) changes in accounting policies and practices or accounting standards; (xv) results of examinations of the Company and the Bank by their regulators, including the possibility that the regulators may, among other things, require the Company to limit its business activities, change its business mix, increase its allowance for credit losses, write-down assets or increase its capital levels, or affect its ability to borrow funds or maintain or increase deposits, which could adversely affect its liquidity and earnings; (xvi) costs and effects of litigation, including settlements and judgments; (xvii) competition; and (xviii) natural disasters, war, terrorist activities or civil unrest and their effects on economic and business environments in which the Company operates. The Company wishes to advise readers that the factors listed above and other risks described in the Company’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, including, without limitation, those described under “Item 1A. Risk Factors,” subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other documents filed or furnished from time to time by the Company with the SEC (which are available on our website at www.greatsouthernbank.com and the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov), could affect the Company’s financial performance and cause the Company’s actual results for future periods to differ materially from any opinions or statements expressed with respect to future periods in any current statements.
The Company does not undertake-and specifically declines any obligation- to publicly release the result of any revisions which may be made to any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statements or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events.
The following tables set forth selected consolidated financial information of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated. Financial data at all dates other than December 31, 2024, and for all periods is unaudited. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, which consist only of normal recurring accrual adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of the results at and for such unaudited dates and periods have been included. The results of operations and other data for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, and the three months ended March 31, 2025, are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations which may be expected for any future period.
June 30,
December 31,
2025
2024
Selected Financial Condition Data:
(In thousands)
Total assets
$
5,854,672
$
5,981,628
Loans receivable, gross
4,604,943
4,761,848
Allowance for credit losses
64,815
64,760
Other real estate owned, net
6,040
5,993
Available-for-sale securities, at fair value
527,543
533,373
Held-to-maturity securities, at amortized cost
183,100
187,433
Deposits
4,684,126
4,605,549
Total borrowings
450,483
679,341
Total stockholders’ equity
622,368
599,568
Non-performing assets
8,084
9,566
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
Three Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2025
2024
2025
(In thousands)
Selected Operating Data:
Interest income
$
80,975
$
80,927
$
161,218
$
158,317
$
80,243
Interest expense
30,012
34,109
60,921
66,683
30,909
Net interest income
50,963
46,818
100,297
91,634
49,334
Provision (credit) for credit losses on loans and unfunded commitments
(110
)
(607
)
(458
)
23
(348
)
Non-interest income
8,212
9,833
14,802
16,639
6,590
Non-interest expense
35,005
36,409
69,827
70,831
34,822
Provision for income taxes
4,494
3,861
8,784
7,024
4,290
Net income
$
19,786
$
16,988
$
36,946
$
30,395
$
17,160
At or For the Three Months Ended
At or For the Six Months Ended
At or For the Three Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2025
2024
2025
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Per Common Share:
Net income (fully diluted)
$
1.72
$
1.45
$
3.18
$
2.58
$
1.47
Book value
$
54.61
$
49.11
$
54.61
$
49.11
$
53.03
Earnings Performance Ratios:
Annualized return on average assets
1.34
%
1.17
%
1.24
%
1.05
%
1.15
%
Annualized return on average common stockholders’ equity
12.81
%
12.03
%
12.06
%
10.69
%
11.30
%
Net interest margin
3.68
%
3.43
%
3.63
%
3.38
%
3.57
%
Average interest rate spread
3.09
%
2.77
%
3.05
%
2.71
%
3.00
%
Efficiency ratio
59.16
%
64.27
%
60.67
%
65.42
%
62.27
%
Non-interest expense to average total assets
2.37
%
2.50
%
2.35
%
2.44
%
2.34
%
Asset Quality Ratios:
Allowance for credit losses to period-end loans
1.41
%
1.39
%
1.41
%
1.39
%
1.36
%
Non-performing assets to period-end assets
0.14
%
0.34
%
0.14
%
0.34
%
0.16
%
Non-performing loans to period-end loans
0.04
%
0.23
%
0.04
%
0.23
%
0.07
%
Annualized net charge-offs (recoveries) to average loans
(0.01
)%
(0.01
)%
0.00
%
0.00
%
0.00
%
Great Southern Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiaries Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition (In thousands, except number of shares)
June 30, 2025
December 31, 2024
March 31, 2025
Assets
Cash
$
110,007
$
109,366
$
106,336
Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions
135,906
86,390
110,845
Cash and cash equivalents
245,913
195,756
217,181
Available-for-sale securities
527,543
533,373
535,914
Held-to-maturity securities
183,100
187,433
185,853
Mortgage loans held for sale
5,616
6,937
6,857
Loans receivable, net of allowance for credit losses of $64,815 – June 2025; $64,760 – December 2024; $64,704 – March 2025
4,534,287
4,690,393
4,690,636
Interest receivable
20,644
20,430
21,504
Prepaid expenses and other assets
133,614
136,594
132,930
Other real estate owned and repossessions, net
6,040
5,993
6,036
Premises and equipment, net
134,337
132,466
132,165
Goodwill and other intangible assets
9,877
10,094
9,985
Federal Home Loan Bank stock and other interest-earning assets
23,714
28,392
25,813
Current and deferred income taxes
29,987
33,767
28,968
Total Assets
$
5,854,672
$
5,981,628
$
5,993,842
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Liabilities
Deposits
$
4,684,126
$
4,605,549
$
4,758,046
Securities sold under reverse repurchase agreements with customers
54,802
64,444
75,322
Short-term borrowings
369,907
514,247
359,907
Subordinated debentures issued to capital trust
25,774
25,774
25,774
Subordinated notes
—
74,876
74,950
Accrued interest payable
4,065
12,761
5,416
Advances from borrowers for taxes and insurance
8,822
5,272
7,451
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
76,763
70,634
65,528
Liability for unfunded commitments
8,045
8,503
8,155
Total Liabilities
5,232,304
5,382,060
5,380,549
Stockholders’ Equity
Capital stock
Preferred stock, $.01 par value; authorized 1,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding June 2025, December 2024 and March 2025 -0- shares
—
—
—
Common stock, $.01 par value; authorized 20,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding June 2025 – 11,396,533 shares; December 2024 – 11,723,548 shares; March 2025 – 11,565,211 shares
114
117
116
Additional paid-in capital
51,646
50,336
51,076
Retained earnings
611,921
603,477
606,239
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(41,313
)
(54,362
)
(44,138
)
Total Stockholders’ Equity
622,368
599,568
613,293
Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
$
5,854,672
$
5,981,628
$
5,993,842
Great Southern Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiaries Consolidated Statements of Income (In thousands, except per share data)
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
Three Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
March 31,
2025
2024
2025
2024
2025
Interest Income
Loans
$
73,830
$
74,295
$
146,901
$
145,371
$
73,071
Investment securities and other
7,145
6,632
14,317
12,946
7,172
80,975
80,927
161,218
158,317
80,243
Interest Expense
Deposits
24,368
27,783
48,968
55,420
24,600
Securities sold under reverse repurchase agreements
372
394
743
727
371
Short-term borrowings, overnight FHLBank borrowings and other interest-bearing liabilities
3,974
4,373
8,424
7,417
4,450
Subordinated debentures issued to capital trust
389
454
771
908
382
Subordinated notes
909
1,105
2,015
2,211
1,106
30,012
34,109
60,921
66,683
30,909
Net Interest Income
50,963
46,818
100,297
91,634
49,334
Provision for Credit Losses on Loans
—
—
—
500
—
Provision (Credit) for Unfunded Commitments
(110
)
(607
)
(458
)
(477
)
(348
)
Net Interest Income After Provision for Credit Losses and Provision (Credit) for Unfunded Commitments
51,073
47,425
100,755
91,611
49,682
Non-interest Income
Commissions
411
269
673
650
262
Overdraft and Insufficient funds fees
1,266
1,230
2,481
2,519
1,215
POS and ATM fee income and service charges
3,444
3,588
6,678
6,771
3,234
Net gains on loan sales
893
1,127
1,494
1,804
601
Late charges and fees on loans
340
136
583
303
243
Gain (loss) on derivative interest rate products
(28
)
(7
)
(52
)
(20
)
(24
)
Other income
1,886
3,490
2,945
4,612
1,059
8,212
9,833
14,802
16,639
6,590
Non-interest Expense
Salaries and employee benefits
20,005
19,886
40,134
39,542
20,129
Net occupancy and equipment expense
8,435
7,841
16,968
15,680
8,533
Postage
825
777
1,756
1,584
931
Insurance
1,095
1,263
2,260
2,407
1,165
Advertising
705
891
995
1,241
290
Office supplies and printing
238
236
504
503
266
Telephone
705
685
1,411
1,406
706
Legal, audit and other professional fees
929
1,864
1,967
3,589
1,038
Expense (income) on other real estate and repossessions
(168
)
285
(238
)
346
(70
)
Acquired intangible asset amortization
108
109
216
217
108
Other operating expenses
2,128
2,572
3,854
4,316
1,726
35,005
36,409
69,827
70,831
34,822
Income Before Income Taxes
24,280
20,849
45,730
37,419
21,450
Provision for Income Taxes
4,494
3,861
8,784
7,024
4,290
Net Income
$
19,786
$
16,988
$
36,946
$
30,395
$
17,160
Earnings Per Common Share
Basic
$
1.73
$
1.46
$
3.20
$
2.60
$
1.47
Diluted
$
1.72
$
1.45
$
3.18
$
2.58
$
1.47
Dividends Declared Per Common Share
$
0.40
$
0.40
$
0.80
$
0.80
$
0.40
Average Balances, Interest Rates and Yields
The following table presents, for the periods indicated, the total dollar amounts of interest income from average interest-earning assets and the resulting yields, as well as the interest expense on average interest-bearing liabilities, expressed both in dollars and rates, and the net interest margin. Average balances of loans receivable include the average balances of nonaccrual loans for each period. Interest income on loans includes interest received on nonaccrual loans on a cash basis. Interest income on loans also includes the amortization of net loan fees, which were deferred in accordance with accounting standards. Net fees included in interest income were $1.1 million for both the three months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024. Net fees included in interest income were $2.1 million and $2.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Tax-exempt income was not calculated on a tax equivalent basis. The table does not reflect any effect of income taxes.
June 30, 2025
Three Months Ended June 30, 2025
Three Months Ended June 30, 2024
Average
Yield/
Average
Yield/
Yield/Rate
Balance
Interest
Rate
Balance
Interest
Rate
(Dollars in thousands)
Interest-earning assets:
Loans receivable:
One- to four-family residential
4.24
%
$
822,283
$
8,750
4.27
%
$
877,957
$
8,769
4.02
%
Other residential
6.91
1,565,447
27,281
6.99
1,072,168
19,633
7.36
Commercial real estate
6.19
1,489,015
23,082
6.22
1,499,893
23,296
6.25
Construction
7.07
480,254
8,617
7.20
803,478
15,525
7.77
Commercial business
5.93
208,119
3,517
6.78
266,187
4,375
6.61
Other loans
6.39
167,548
2,583
6.18
170,467
2,697
6.36
Total loans receivable
6.16
4,732,666
73,830
6.26
4,690,150
74,295
6.37
Investment securities
3.17
727,336
6,099
3.36
696,239
5,347
3.09
Other interest-earning assets
4.37
97,463
1,046
4.30
97,340
1,285
5.31
Total interest-earning assets
5.74
5,557,465
80,975
5.84
5,483,729
80,927
5.94
Non-interest-earning assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
100,289
94,669
Other non-earning assets
256,923
250,244
Total assets
$
5,914,677
$
5,828,642
Interest-bearing liabilities:
Interest-bearing demand and savings
1.41
$
2,225,933
7,791
1.40
$
2,234,824
9,794
1.76
Time deposits
3.42
757,608
6,521
3.45
894,475
9,073
4.08
Brokered deposits
4.44
895,340
10,056
4.50
683,337
8,916
5.25
Total deposits
2.47
3,878,881
24,368
2.52
3,812,636
27,783
2.93
Securities sold under reverse repurchase agreements
2.33
65,607
372
2.27
76,969
394
2.06
Short-term borrowings, overnight FHLBank borrowings and other interest-bearing liabilities
4.55
347,303
3,974
4.59
339,270
4,373
5.18
Subordinated debentures issued to capital trust
6.14
25,774
389
6.05
25,774
454
7.08
Subordinated notes
—
62,631
909
5.82
74,699
1,105
5.95
Total interest-bearing liabilities
2.66
4,380,196
30,012
2.75
4,329,348
34,109
3.17
Non-interest-bearing liabilities:
Demand deposits
849,862
853,555
Other liabilities
66,585
80,905
Total liabilities
5,296,643
5,263,808
Stockholders’ equity
618,034
564,834
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
5,914,677
$
5,828,642
Net interest income:
$
50,963
$
46,818
Interest rate spread
3.08
%
3.09
%
2.77
%
Net interest margin*
3.68
%
3.43
%
Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities
126.9
%
126.7
%
*Defined as the Company’s net interest income divided by average total interest-earning assets.
June 30, 2025
Six Months Ended June 30, 2025
Six Months Ended June 30, 2024
Average
Yield/
Average
Yield/
Yield/Rate
Balance
Interest
Rate
Balance
Interest
Rate
(Dollars in thousands)
Interest-earning assets:
Loans receivable:
One- to four-family residential
4.24
%
$
826,426
$
17,318
4.23
%
$
883,963
$
17,466
3.97
%
Other residential
6.91
1,555,881
53,731
6.96
1,016,071
36,491
7.22
Commercial real estate
6.19
1,499,665
46,096
6.20
1,499,767
46,064
6.18
Construction
7.07
485,392
17,270
7.17
830,025
31,368
7.60
Commercial business
5.93
209,944
7,339
7.05
276,131
8,984
6.54
Other loans
6.39
166,989
5,147
6.22
172,051
4,998
5.84
Total loans receivable
6.16
4,744,297
146,901
6.24
4,678,008
145,371
6.25
Investment securities
3.17
732,699
12,173
3.35
682,960
10,357
3.05
Other interest-earning assets
4.37
101,238
2,144
4.27
98,922
2,589
5.26
Total interest-earning assets
5.74
5,578,234
161,218
5.83
5,459,890
158,317
5.83
Non-interest-earning assets:
Cash and cash equivalents
100,537
92,572
Other non-earning assets
259,692
243,029
Total assets
$
5,938,463
$
5,795,491
Interest-bearing liabilities:
Interest-bearing demand and savings
1.41
$
2,223,716
15,588
1.41
$
2,229,302
19,276
1.74
Time deposits
3.42
764,791
13,235
3.49
916,098
18,238
4.00
Brokered deposits
4.44
893,983
20,145
4.54
686,079
17,906
5.25
Total deposits
2.47
3,882,490
48,968
2.54
3,831,479
55,420
2.91
Securities sold under reverse repurchase agreements
2.33
73,957
743
2.03
75,718
727
1.93
Short-term borrowings, overnight FHLBank borrowings and other interest-bearing liabilities
4.55
369,849
8,424
4.59
290,431
7,417
5.14
Subordinated debentures issued to capital trust
6.14
25,774
771
6.03
25,774
908
7.08
Subordinated notes
—
68,741
2,015
5.91
74,659
2,211
5.96
Total interest-bearing liabilities
2.66
4,420,811
60,921
2.78
4,298,061
66,683
3.12
Non-interest-bearing liabilities:
Demand deposits
835,888
854,202
Other liabilities
68,961
74,391
Total liabilities
5,325,660
5,226,654
Stockholders’ equity
612,803
568,837
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
5,938,463
$
5,795,491
Net interest income:
$
100,297
$
91,634
Interest rate spread
3.08
%
3.05
%
2.71
%
Net interest margin*
3.63
%
3.38
%
Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities
126.2
%
127.0
%
*Defined as the Company’s net interest income divided by average total interest-earning assets.
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
This document contains certain financial information determined by methods other than in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”), specifically, the ratio of tangible common equity to tangible assets.
In calculating the ratio of tangible common equity to tangible assets, we subtract period-end intangible assets from common equity and from total assets. Management believes that the presentation of this measure excluding the impact of intangible assets provides useful supplemental information that is helpful in understanding our financial condition and results of operations, as it provides a method to assess management’s success in utilizing our tangible capital as well as our capital strength. Management also believes that providing a measure that excludes balances of intangible assets, which are subjective components of valuation, facilitates the comparison of our performance with the performance of our peers. In addition, management believes that this is a standard financial measure used in the banking industry to evaluate performance.
This non-GAAP financial measurement is supplemental and is not a substitute for any analysis based on GAAP financial measures. Because not all companies use the same calculation of non-GAAP measures, this presentation may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures as calculated by other companies.
Non-GAAP Reconciliation: Ratio of Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets
June 30,
December 31,
2025
2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Common equity at period end
$
622,368
$
599,568
Less: Intangible assets at period end
9,877
10,094
Tangible common equity at period end (a)
$
612,491
$
589,474
Total assets at period end
$
5,854,672
$
5,981,628
Less: Intangible assets at period end
9,877
10,094
Tangible assets at period end (b)
$
5,844,795
$
5,971,534
Tangible common equity to tangible assets (a) / (b)
10.48
%
9.87
%
CONTACT:
Jeff Tryka, CFA, Investor Relations, (616) 233-0500 GSBC@lambert.com
SHREWSBURY, United Kingdom, July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Lightchain AI a decentralized infrastructure protocol focused on artificial intelligence, has confirmed the launch of its mainnet in July 2025. This milestone marks a significant step forward in integrating AI execution into blockchain environments through real-time task processing, developer tools, and incentive-driven consensus.
Designed with scalability, transparency, and performance at its core, Lightchain AI’s architecture introduces a new layer of utility to blockchain networks. The protocol features the Artificial Intelligence Virtual Machine (AIVM), which enables distributed training and inference of AI models across validator nodes using zero-knowledge proofs and federated learning mechanisms.
At the heart of the network lies a novel Proof of Intelligence (PoI) consensus, rewarding nodes for completing useful AI tasks such as model optimization and data analysis. This approach transforms compute power into verifiable contributions that can support diverse use cases across healthcare, finance, logistics, and more.
“Launching our mainnet in July is a major step toward making AI-based computation more open, distributed, and accessible,” said a Lightchain AI spokesperson. “We are building a transparent ecosystem where developers and node operators can work together to create meaningful real-world AI solutions.”
Artificial Intelligence Virtual Machine (AIVM): Secure, privacy-preserving AI task execution
Gas Optimization: Fee adjustment based on task complexity and network load
Decentralized Storage: Enables verifiable data integrity and transparency
Developer Ecosystem: Public GitHub repositories, API libraries, and onboarding documentation
$150,000 Grant Pool: Available for developers building tooling, explorers, or dApps
Validator Onboarding: Node registration and task allocation tools now live
The upcoming launch builds on Lightchain AI’s successful $21.1 million presale across 15 funding rounds, reflecting early community engagement and confidence in the platform’s mission. The Bonus Round remains active at a fixed price of $0.007 per token as Lightchain finalizes preparations for mainnet rollout.
Developers, validators, and ecosystem partners are invited to join the growing network and participate in shaping the future of decentralized artificial intelligence.
Disclaimer:This content is provided byLightchain AI.The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented.We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article.This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital.It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose.Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release.In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility.Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.
Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.
SHREWSBURY, United Kingdom, July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Lightchain AI a decentralized infrastructure protocol focused on artificial intelligence, has confirmed the launch of its mainnet in July 2025. This milestone marks a significant step forward in integrating AI execution into blockchain environments through real-time task processing, developer tools, and incentive-driven consensus.
Designed with scalability, transparency, and performance at its core, Lightchain AI’s architecture introduces a new layer of utility to blockchain networks. The protocol features the Artificial Intelligence Virtual Machine (AIVM), which enables distributed training and inference of AI models across validator nodes using zero-knowledge proofs and federated learning mechanisms.
At the heart of the network lies a novel Proof of Intelligence (PoI) consensus, rewarding nodes for completing useful AI tasks such as model optimization and data analysis. This approach transforms compute power into verifiable contributions that can support diverse use cases across healthcare, finance, logistics, and more.
“Launching our mainnet in July is a major step toward making AI-based computation more open, distributed, and accessible,” said a Lightchain AI spokesperson. “We are building a transparent ecosystem where developers and node operators can work together to create meaningful real-world AI solutions.”
Artificial Intelligence Virtual Machine (AIVM): Secure, privacy-preserving AI task execution
Gas Optimization: Fee adjustment based on task complexity and network load
Decentralized Storage: Enables verifiable data integrity and transparency
Developer Ecosystem: Public GitHub repositories, API libraries, and onboarding documentation
$150,000 Grant Pool: Available for developers building tooling, explorers, or dApps
Validator Onboarding: Node registration and task allocation tools now live
The upcoming launch builds on Lightchain AI’s successful $21.1 million presale across 15 funding rounds, reflecting early community engagement and confidence in the platform’s mission. The Bonus Round remains active at a fixed price of $0.007 per token as Lightchain finalizes preparations for mainnet rollout.
Developers, validators, and ecosystem partners are invited to join the growing network and participate in shaping the future of decentralized artificial intelligence.
Disclaimer:This content is provided byLightchain AI.The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented.We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article.This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital.It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose.Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release.In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility.Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.
Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.
Source: US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Note: The expiration time in the watch graphic is amended if the watch is replaced, cancelled or extended.Note: Click for Watch Status Reports. SEL0
URGENT – IMMEDIATE BROADCAST REQUESTED Severe Thunderstorm Watch Number 520 NWS Storm Prediction Center Norman OK 550 PM EDT Wed Jul 16 2025
The NWS Storm Prediction Center has issued a
* Severe Thunderstorm Watch for portions of Northern Indiana Southwest Lower Michigan Lake Michigan
* Effective this Wednesday afternoon from 550 PM until Midnight EDT.
* Primary threats include… Scattered damaging wind gusts to 65 mph possible
SUMMARY…Thunderstorms currently affecting northeast Illinois will track eastward across the watch area through the early evening. Locally damaging wind gusts are the primary concern.
The severe thunderstorm watch area is approximately along and 40 statute miles east and west of a line from 60 miles south of South Bend IN to 35 miles north northwest of Kalamazoo MI. For a complete depiction of the watch see the associated watch outline update (WOUS64 KWNS WOU0).
PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS…
REMEMBER…A Severe Thunderstorm Watch means conditions are favorable for severe thunderstorms in and close to the watch area. Persons in these areas should be on the lookout for threatening weather conditions and listen for later statements and possible warnings. Severe thunderstorms can and occasionally do produce tornadoes.
&&
OTHER WATCH INFORMATION…CONTINUE…WW 517…WW 518…WW 519…
AVIATION…A few severe thunderstorms with hail surface and aloft to 1 inch. Extreme turbulence and surface wind gusts to 55 knots. A few cumulonimbi with maximum tops to 500. Mean storm motion vector 25025.
…Hart
Note: The Aviation Watch (SAW) product is an approximation to the watch area. The actual watch is depicted by the shaded areas. SAW0 WW 520 SEVERE TSTM IN MI LM 162150Z – 170400Z AXIS..40 STATUTE MILES EAST AND WEST OF LINE.. 60S SBN/SOUTH BEND IN/ – 35NNW AZO/KALAMAZOO MI/ ..AVIATION COORDS.. 35NM E/W /38ENE BVT – 15WSW GRR/ HAIL SURFACE AND ALOFT..1 INCH. WIND GUSTS..55 KNOTS. MAX TOPS TO 500. MEAN STORM MOTION VECTOR 25025.
LAT…LON 40838709 42698660 42698503 40838555
THIS IS AN APPROXIMATION TO THE WATCH AREA. FOR A COMPLETE DEPICTION OF THE WATCH SEE WOUS64 KWNS FOR WOU0.
Watch 520 Status Report Message has not been issued yet.
Source: Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission
A lucky handful of Mawson expeditioners visited the Taylor Glacier emperor penguin colony in July, to collect photos for the annual population census. No more than 12 people get to visit the colony each year, due to its ‘Antarctic Specially Protected Area’ (ASPA) status. Population counts have been ongoing since 1957, and averaged about 2500 birds between 2002 and 2023. This season, Mawson station’s Senior Field Training Officer, Lee Warner, and five other expeditioners, made the 90 km journey across the sea ice, to Colbeck Hut.
Mr Warner said the party had to stop regularly to measure sea-ice thickness, which must be at least 60 cm thick for safe passage by Hägglunds. “Every change in appearance of the ice is generally a reason to test and assess the sea ice,” Mr Warner said. “Sea-ice conditions and ice thickness are influenced by glaciers, islands, snow depth, rafted ice and hidden anomalies like kelp beds, tide cracks and open water leads. “We measure ice quality and thickness every hundred metres, or every few kilometres, depending on whether there are anomalies or not.” Once at the hut a team of four made the three kilometre trip to a vantage point above the colony where a number of automated cameras have been installed. The cameras take photos of the colony every day throughout the year to show when the penguins arrive and leave. “Pathfinding through waist deep powder snow to find the cameras to download the imagery captured over the last six to eight months is very satisfying. It’s a great team effort,” Mr Warner said. The team also took the all-important census photos – a series of 30 photos looking down and across the colony, which are stitched together into a panorama (see banner above). Scientists can then count the number of penguins. Senior Comms Tech Officer, Danny Novkovski, said the census photos and automated camera images were processed back at Mawson station and uploaded to the Head Office server for seabird expert, Dr Barbara Wienecke, to access them and conduct the census work. Dr Wienecke said Taylor Glacier is one of only two known sites where emperor penguins breed entirely on land, rather than land-fast sea ice (sea ice attached to land). The long-term monitoring project aims to assess the response of the penguins to environmental change and human activities, and ensure ASPA management plans continue to safeguard the animals. This content was last updated 3 minutes ago on 17 July 2025.
HOUSTON, TX, July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Pyrophyte Acquisition Corp. II (the “Company”) today announced the pricing of its initial public offering of 17,500,000 units at a price of $10.00 per unit. The units will be listed on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) and are expected to trade under the ticker symbol “PAII.U” beginning on July 17, 2025. Each unit consists of one Class A ordinary share and one-half of one redeemable warrant, with each whole warrant exercisable to purchase one Class A ordinary share at a price of $11.50 per share, subject to certain adjustments. Only whole warrants will be exercisable. Once the securities comprising the units begin separate trading, the Class A ordinary shares and the warrants are expected to be listed on the NYSE under the symbols “PAII” and “PAII WS,” respectively. Only whole warrants will trade. The offering is expected to close on July 18, 2025.
Pyrophyte Acquisition Corp. II is a blank check company formed for the purpose of effecting a merger, amalgamation, share exchange, asset acquisition, share purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses. While the Company may pursue an initial business combination in any industry, sector or geographic region, it expects to target opportunities and companies in the energy sector.
UBS Investment Bank is acting as the lead book-running manager for the offering and Brookline Capital Markets, a division of Arcadia Securities, LLC is acting as co-manager for the offering. The Company has granted the underwriters a 45-day option to purchase up to an additional 2,625,000 units at the initial public offering price to cover over-allotments, if any.
A registration statement relating to these securities was declared effective by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on July 16, 2025. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.
The offering is being made only by means of a prospectus. Copies of the prospectus may be obtained, when available, from UBS Securities LLC, 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10019, Attention: Prospectus Department, or by email at: prospectusrequest@ubs.com.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This press release contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements,” including with respect to the proposed initial public offering and the anticipated use of the net proceeds from the offering. No assurance can be given that the offering discussed above will be completed on the terms described, or at all, that the net proceeds of the offering will be used as indicated, or that the Company will ultimately complete a business combination transaction. Forward-looking statements are subject to numerous conditions, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, including those set forth in the Risk Factors section of the Company’s registration statement for the offering, available on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov, and the Company’s preliminary prospectus. The Company undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the issuance of this release, except as required by law.
HOUSTON, TX, July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Pyrophyte Acquisition Corp. II (the “Company”) today announced the pricing of its initial public offering of 17,500,000 units at a price of $10.00 per unit. The units will be listed on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) and are expected to trade under the ticker symbol “PAII.U” beginning on July 17, 2025. Each unit consists of one Class A ordinary share and one-half of one redeemable warrant, with each whole warrant exercisable to purchase one Class A ordinary share at a price of $11.50 per share, subject to certain adjustments. Only whole warrants will be exercisable. Once the securities comprising the units begin separate trading, the Class A ordinary shares and the warrants are expected to be listed on the NYSE under the symbols “PAII” and “PAII WS,” respectively. Only whole warrants will trade. The offering is expected to close on July 18, 2025.
Pyrophyte Acquisition Corp. II is a blank check company formed for the purpose of effecting a merger, amalgamation, share exchange, asset acquisition, share purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses. While the Company may pursue an initial business combination in any industry, sector or geographic region, it expects to target opportunities and companies in the energy sector.
UBS Investment Bank is acting as the lead book-running manager for the offering and Brookline Capital Markets, a division of Arcadia Securities, LLC is acting as co-manager for the offering. The Company has granted the underwriters a 45-day option to purchase up to an additional 2,625,000 units at the initial public offering price to cover over-allotments, if any.
A registration statement relating to these securities was declared effective by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on July 16, 2025. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.
The offering is being made only by means of a prospectus. Copies of the prospectus may be obtained, when available, from UBS Securities LLC, 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10019, Attention: Prospectus Department, or by email at: prospectusrequest@ubs.com.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This press release contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements,” including with respect to the proposed initial public offering and the anticipated use of the net proceeds from the offering. No assurance can be given that the offering discussed above will be completed on the terms described, or at all, that the net proceeds of the offering will be used as indicated, or that the Company will ultimately complete a business combination transaction. Forward-looking statements are subject to numerous conditions, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, including those set forth in the Risk Factors section of the Company’s registration statement for the offering, available on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov, and the Company’s preliminary prospectus. The Company undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the issuance of this release, except as required by law.
CONWAY, Ark., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Home BancShares, Inc. (NYSE: HOMB) (“Home” or the “Company”), parent company of Centennial Bank, released quarterly earnings today.
Quarterly Highlights
Metric
Q2 2025
Q1 2025
Q4 2024
Q3 2024
Q2 2024
Net income
$118.4 million
$115.2 million
$100.6 million
$100.0 million
$101.5 million
Net income, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
$114.6 million
$111.9 million
$99.8 million
$99.0 million
$103.9 million
Total revenue (net)
$271.0 million
$260.1 million
$258.4 million
$258.0 million
$254.6 million
Income before income taxes
$152.0 million
$147.2 million
$129.5 million
$129.1 million
$133.4 million
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR) (non-GAAP)(1)
$155.0 million
$147.2 million
$146.2 million
$148.0 million
$141.4 million
PPNR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
$150.4 million
$142.8 million
$145.2 million
$146.6 million
$141.9 million
Pre-tax net income to total revenue (net)
56.08%
56.58%
50.11%
50.03%
52.40%
Pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net) (non-GAAP)(1)
54.39%
54.91%
49.74%
49.49%
52.59%
P5NR (Pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage) (PPNR to total revenue (net)) (non-GAAP)(1)
57.19%
56.58%
56.57%
57.35%
55.54%
P5NR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
55.49%
54.91%
56.20%
56.81%
55.73%
ROA
2.08%
2.07%
1.77%
1.74%
1.79%
ROA, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
2.02%
2.01%
1.76%
1.72%
1.83%
NIM
4.44%
4.44%
4.39%
4.28%
4.27%
Purchase accounting accretion
$1.2 million
$1.4 million
$1.6 million
$1.9 million
$1.9 million
ROE
11.77%
11.75%
10.13%
10.23%
10.73%
ROE, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
11.39%
11.41%
10.05%
10.12%
10.98%
ROTCE (non-GAAP)(1)
18.26%
18.39%
15.94%
16.26%
17.29%
ROTCE, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
17.68%
17.87%
15.82%
16.09%
17.69%
Diluted earnings per share
$0.60
$0.58
$0.51
$0.50
$0.51
Diluted earnings per share, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
$0.58
$0.56
$0.50
$0.50
$0.52
Non-performing assets to total assets
0.60%
0.56%
0.63%
0.63%
0.56%
Common equity tier 1 capital
15.6%
15.4%
15.1%
14.7%
14.4%
Leverage
13.4%
13.3%
13.0%
12.5%
12.3%
Tier 1 capital
15.6%
15.4%
15.1%
14.7%
14.4%
Total risk-based capital
19.3%
19.1%
18.7%
18.3%
18.0%
Allowance for credit losses to total loans
1.86%
1.87%
1.87%
2.11%
2.00%
Book value per share
$20.71
$20.40
$19.92
$19.91
$19.30
Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)(1)
$13.44
$13.15
$12.68
$12.67
$12.08
Dividends per share
$0.20
$0.195
$0.195
$0.195
$0.18
Shareholder buyback yield(2)
0.49%
0.53%
0.05%
0.56%
0.67%
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release. (2) Calculation of this metric is included in the schedules accompanying this release.
“I am once again very pleased with our quarterly results. Diluted EPS of $0.60 and net income of $118.4 million are both records for HOMB. The ongoing, consistent performance from our bankers led to numerous other records being set in the second quarter, further highlighting that strength is no accident,” said John Allison, Chairman & CEO of HOMB.
Stock Repurchases and Dividends
During the three-month period ended June 30, 2025, the Company repurchased 1.0 million shares of common stock, which equated to a shareholder buyback yield of 0.49%(1). In comparison, during the three-month period ended March 31, 2025, the Company repurchased 1.0 million shares of common stock, which equated to a shareholder buyback yield of 0.53%(1). The Company defines shareholder buyback yield as the percentage of the Company’s market capitalization spent on share repurchases. It reflects how much the Company is returning to the shareholders by reducing the number of outstanding shares, and it is calculated by dividing the Company’s total share repurchase cost for the period by the Company’s total market capitalization at the beginning of the period.
In addition, during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, the Company paid a dividend of $0.20 per share. This cash dividend represented a $0.005 per share, or 2.6%, increase over the $0.195 cash dividend paid during the first quarter of 2025.
Operating Highlights
Net income for the three-month period ended June 30, 2025 was $118.4 million, or $0.60 diluted earnings per share, both of which were records for the Company. When adjusting for non-fundamental items, net income and diluted earnings per share on an as-adjusted basis (non-GAAP), were $114.6 million(2) and $0.58 per share(2), respectively, for the three months ended June 30, 2025.
Our net interest margin was 4.44% for both of the three-month periods ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025. The yield on loans was 7.36% and 7.38% for the three months ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively, as average loans increased from $14.89 billion to $15.06 billion. Additionally, the rate on interest bearing deposits decreased to 2.64% as of June 30, 2025, from 2.67% as of March 31, 2025, while average interest-bearing deposits increased from $13.20 billion to $13.43 billion.
During the second quarter of 2025, there was $516,000 of event interest income compared to $1.3 million of event interest income for the first quarter of 2025. Purchase accounting accretion on acquired loans was $1.2 million and $1.4 million for the three-month periods ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively, and average purchase accounting loan discounts were $16.2 million and $17.5 million for the three-month periods ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively.
Net interest income on a fully taxable equivalent basis was $222.5 million for the three-month period ended June 30, 2025, and $217.2 million for the three-month period ended March 31, 2025. This increase in net interest income for the three-month period ended June 30, 2025, was the result of a $6.6 million increase in interest income, partially offset by a $1.3 million increase in interest expense. The $6.6 million increase in interest income was primarily the result of a $5.3 million increase in loan income and a $2.3 million increase in income from deposits with other banks, partially offset by a $1.0 million decrease in investment income. The $1.3 million increase in interest expense was due to a $1.7 million increase in interest expense on deposits, partially offset by a $363,000 decrease in FHLB and other borrowed funds.
The Company reported $51.1 million of non-interest income for the second quarter of 2025. The most important components of non-interest income were $13.5 million from other income, $12.6 million from other service charges and fees, $9.6 million from service charges on deposit accounts, $5.2 million from trust fees, $4.8 million in mortgage lending income, $2.7 million from dividends from FHLB, FRB, FNBB and other, $1.4 million from the increase in cash value of life insurance and $972,000 from the gain on sale of branches, equipment and other assets, net. Included within other income was $3.5 million in special income from equity investments and $885,000 in legal fee reimbursements.
Non-interest expense for the second quarter of 2025 was $116.0 million. The most important components of non-interest expense were $64.3 million from salaries and employee benefits, $29.3 million in other operating expense, $14.0 million in occupancy and equipment expenses and $8.4 million in data processing expenses. Included within other expense was $3.3 million in legal claims expense, which was partially offset by a $1.5 million FDIC assessment reduction. For the second quarter of 2025, our efficiency ratio was 41.68%, and our efficiency ratio, as adjusted (non-GAAP), was 42.01%(2).
Financial Condition
Total loans receivable were $15.18 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $14.95 billion at March 31, 2025. Total loans receivable of $15.18 billion were a record for the Company. Total deposits were $17.49 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $17.54 billion at March 31, 2025. Total assets were $22.91 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $22.99 billion at March 31, 2025.
During the second quarter of 2025, the Company had a $228.5 million increase in loans. Our community banking footprint experienced $106.8 million in organic loan growth during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, and Centennial CFG experienced $121.7 million of organic loan growth and had loans of $1.83 billion at June 30, 2025.
Non-performing loans to total loans were 0.63% and 0.60% at June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively. Non-performing assets to total assets were 0.60% and 0.56% at June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively. Net loans charged-off were $1.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, and net loans recovered were $4.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The charge-off detail by region for the quarters ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025 can be seen below.
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Charge-offs
$
2,588
$
462
$
181
$
582
$
245
$
13
$
4,071
Recoveries
(2,172
)
(223
)
—
(22
)
(577
)
(2
)
(2,996
)
Net charge-offs (recoveries)
$
416
$
239
$
181
$
560
$
(332
)
$
11
$
1,075
For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Charge-offs
$
444
$
474
$
—
$
53
$
2,479
$
8
$
3,458
Recoveries
(6,514
)
(228
)
(658
)
(3
)
(117
)
(2
)
(7,522
)
Net (recoveries) charge-offs
$
(6,070
)
$
246
$
(658
)
$
50
$
2,362
$
6
$
(4,064
)
At June 30, 2025, non-performing loans were $96.3 million, and non-performing assets were $137.8 million. At March 31, 2025, non-performing loans were $89.6 million, and non-performing assets were $129.4 million.
The table below shows the non-performing loans and non-performing assets by region as June 30, 2025:
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Non-accrual loans
22,487
16,276
787
11,716
37,833
162
89,261
Loans 90+ days past due
3,557
2,341
—
—
1,133
—
7,031
Total non-performing loans
26,044
18,617
787
11,716
38,966
162
96,292
Foreclosed assets held for sale
17,259
863
22,842
—
565
—
41,529
Other non-performing assets
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Total other non-performing assets
17,259
863
22,842
—
565
—
41,529
Total non-performing assets
43,303
19,480
23,629
11,716
39,531
162
137,821
The table below shows the non-performing loans and non-performing assets by region as March 31, 2025:
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Non-accrual loans
23,694
15,214
2,766
5,444
39,108
157
86,383
Loans 90+ days past due
3,264
—
—
—
—
—
3,264
Total non-performing loans
26,958
15,214
2,766
5,444
39,108
157
89,647
Foreclosed assets held for sale
15,357
1,052
22,820
—
451
—
39,680
Other non-performing assets
63
—
—
—
—
—
63
Total other non-performing assets
15,420
1,052
22,820
—
451
—
39,743
Total non-performing assets
42,378
16,266
25,586
5,444
39,559
157
129,390
The Company’s allowance for credit losses on loans was $281.9 million at June 30, 2025, or 1.86% of total loans, compared to the allowance for credit losses on loans of $279.9 million, or 1.87% of total loans, at March 31, 2025. As of June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, the Company’s allowance for credit losses on loans was 292.72% and 312.27% of its total non-performing loans, respectively.
Stockholders’ equity was $4.09 billion at June 30, 2025, which increased approximately $42.8 million from March 31, 2025. The net increase in stockholders’ equity is primarily associated with the $78.9 million increase in retained earnings, which was partially offset by the $11.4 million increase in accumulated other comprehensive loss and the $27.5 million in stock repurchases for the quarter. Book value per common share was $20.71 at June 30, 2025, compared to $20.40 at March 31, 2025. Tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP) was $13.44(2) at June 30, 2025, compared to $13.15(2) at March 31, 2025. Book value per common share and tangible book value per common share, as of June 30, 2025, were both records for the Company.
Branches
The Company currently has 75 branches in Arkansas, 78 branches in Florida, 58 branches in Texas, 5 branches in Alabama and one branch in New York City.
Conference Call
Management will conduct a conference call to review this information at 1:00 p.m. CT (2:00 p.m. ET) on Thursday, July 17, 2025. We strongly encourage all participants to pre-register for the conference call webcast or the live call using one of the following links. First, participants can pre-register for the conference call webcast using the following link: https://events.q4inc.com/attendee/133918928. Participants who pre-register will be given a unique webcast link to gain immediate access to the conference call webcast. Second, participants can pre-register for the live call using the following link: https://www.netroadshow.com/events/login?show=862a0326&confId=84106. Participants who pre-register will be given the phone number and unique access codes to gain immediate access to the live call. Participants may pre-register now, or at any time prior to the call, and will immediately receive simple instructions via email. The Home BancShares conference call will also be scheduled as an event in your Outlook calendar.
Those without internet access or unable to pre-register may dial in and listen to the live call by calling 1-833-470-1428, Passcode: 171523. A replay of the call will be available by calling 1-866-813-9403, Passcode: 539251, which will be available until July 24, 2025, at 11:59 p.m. CT. Internet access to the call will be available live or in recorded version on the Company’s website at www.homebancshares.com.
About Home BancShares
Home BancShares, Inc. is a bank holding company headquartered in Conway, Arkansas. Its wholly-owned subsidiary, Centennial Bank, provides a broad range of commercial and retail banking plus related financial services to businesses, real estate developers, investors, individuals and municipalities. Centennial Bank has branch locations in Arkansas, Florida, Texas, South Alabama and New York City. The Company’s common stock is traded through the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “HOMB.” The Company was founded in 1998. Visit www.homebancshares.com or www.my100bank.com for more information.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
This press release contains financial information determined by methods other than in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The Company’s management uses these non-GAAP financial measures–including net income (earnings), as adjusted; pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR); PPNR, as adjusted; pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net); pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage; pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage, as adjusted; diluted earnings per common share, as adjusted; return on average assets, as adjusted; return on average assets excluding intangible amortization; return on average assets, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization; return on average common equity, as adjusted; return on average tangible common equity; return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted; return on average tangible common equity excluding intangible amortization; return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization; efficiency ratio, as adjusted; tangible book value per common share and tangible common equity to tangible assets–to provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our performance. These measures typically adjust GAAP performance measures to include the tax benefit associated with revenue items that are tax-exempt, as well as adjust income available to common shareholders for certain significant items or transactions that management believes are not indicative of the Company’s primary business operating results. Since the presentation of these GAAP performance measures and their impact differ between companies, management believes presentations of these non-GAAP financial measures provide useful supplemental information that is essential to a proper understanding of the operating results of the Company’s business. These non-GAAP disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for operating results determined in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other companies. Where non-GAAP financial measures are used, the comparable GAAP financial measure, as well as the reconciliation to the comparable GAAP financial measure, can be found in the tables of this release.
(1) Calculation of this metric is included in the schedules accompanying this release. (2) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
General
This release contains forward-looking statements regarding the Company’s plans, expectations, goals and outlook for the future, including future financial results. Statements in this press release that are not historical facts should be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future events, performance or results. When we use words or phrases like “may,” “plan,” “propose,” “contemplate,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “intend,” “continue,” “expect,” “project,” “predict,” “estimate,” “could,” “should,” “would” and similar expressions, you should consider them as identifying forward-looking statements, although we may use other phrasing. Forward-looking statements of this type speak only as of the date of this news release. By nature, forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Various factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following: economic conditions, credit quality, interest rates, loan demand, real estate values and unemployment, including any future impacts from inflation or changes in tariffs or trade policies; the ability to identify, complete and successfully integrate new acquisitions; the risk that expected cost savings and other benefits from acquisitions may not be fully realized or may take longer to realize than expected; diversion of management time on acquisition-related issues; the availability of and access to capital and liquidity on terms acceptable to us; legislative and regulatory changes and risks and expenses associated with current and future legislation and regulations; technological changes and cybersecurity risks and incidents; the effects of changes in accounting policies and practices; changes in governmental monetary and fiscal policies; political instability, military conflicts and other major domestic or international events; the impacts of recent or future adverse weather events, including hurricanes, and other natural disasters; disruptions, uncertainties and related effects on credit quality, liquidity and other aspects of our business and operations that may result from any future public health crises; competition from other financial institutions; potential claims, expenses and other adverse effects related to current or future litigation, regulatory examinations or other government actions; potential increases in deposit insurance assessments, increased regulatory scrutiny or market disruptions resulting from financial challenges in the banking industry; changes in the assumptions used in making the forward-looking statements; and other factors described in reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), including those factors set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, filed with the SEC on February 27, 2025.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Townsell Director of Investor Relations Home BancShares, Inc. (501) 328-4625
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated End of Period Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)
(In thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
ASSETS
Cash and due from banks
$
291,344
$
319,747
$
281,063
$
265,408
$
229,209
Interest-bearing deposits with other banks
809,729
975,983
629,284
752,269
829,507
Cash and cash equivalents
1,101,073
1,295,730
910,347
1,017,677
1,058,716
Federal funds sold
2,600
6,275
3,725
6,425
—
Investment securities – available-for-sale, net of allowance for credit losses
2,899,968
3,003,320
3,072,639
3,270,620
3,344,539
Investment securities – held-to-maturity, net of allowance for credit losses
1,265,292
1,269,896
1,275,204
1,277,090
1,278,853
Total investment securities
4,165,260
4,273,216
4,347,843
4,547,710
4,623,392
Loans receivable
15,180,624
14,952,116
14,764,500
14,823,979
14,781,457
Allowance for credit losses
(281,869
)
(279,944
)
(275,880
)
(312,574
)
(295,856
)
Loans receivable, net
14,898,755
14,672,172
14,488,620
14,511,405
14,485,601
Bank premises and equipment, net
379,729
384,843
386,322
388,776
383,691
Foreclosed assets held for sale
41,529
39,680
43,407
43,040
41,347
Cash value of life insurance
218,113
221,621
219,786
219,353
218,198
Accrued interest receivable
107,732
115,983
120,129
118,871
120,984
Deferred tax asset, net
174,323
170,120
186,697
176,629
195,041
Goodwill
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
Core deposit intangible
36,255
38,280
40,327
42,395
44,490
Other assets
383,400
376,030
345,292
352,583
350,192
Total assets
$
22,907,022
$
22,992,203
$
22,490,748
$
22,823,117
$
22,919,905
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Liabilities
Deposits:
Demand and non-interest-bearing
$
4,024,574
$
4,079,289
$
4,006,115
$
3,937,168
$
4,068,302
Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts
11,571,949
11,586,106
11,347,850
10,966,426
11,150,516
Time deposits
1,891,909
1,876,096
1,792,332
1,802,116
1,736,985
Total deposits
17,488,432
17,541,491
17,146,297
16,705,710
16,955,803
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
140,813
161,401
162,350
179,416
137,996
FHLB and other borrowed funds
550,500
600,500
600,750
1,300,750
1,301,050
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities
203,004
207,154
181,080
238,058
230,011
Subordinated debentures
438,957
439,102
439,246
439,394
439,542
Total liabilities
18,821,706
18,949,648
18,529,723
18,863,328
19,064,402
Stockholders’ equity
Common stock
1,972
1,982
1,989
1,989
1,997
Capital surplus
2,221,576
2,246,312
2,272,794
2,272,100
2,295,893
Retained earnings
2,097,712
2,018,801
1,942,350
1,880,562
1,819,412
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(235,944
)
(224,540
)
(256,108
)
(194,862
)
(261,799
)
Total stockholders’ equity
4,085,316
4,042,555
3,961,025
3,959,789
3,855,503
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
22,907,022
$
22,992,203
$
22,490,748
$
22,823,117
$
22,919,905
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Income
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(In thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
Interest income:
Loans
$
276,041
$
270,784
$
278,409
$
281,977
$
274,324
$
546,825
$
539,618
Investment securities
Taxable
26,444
27,433
28,943
31,006
32,587
53,877
65,816
Tax-exempt
7,626
7,650
7,704
7,704
7,769
15,276
15,572
Deposits – other banks
8,951
6,620
7,585
12,096
12,564
15,571
23,092
Federal funds sold
53
55
73
62
59
108
120
Total interest income
319,115
312,542
322,714
332,845
327,303
631,657
644,218
Interest expense:
Interest on deposits
88,489
86,786
90,564
97,785
95,741
175,275
188,289
Federal funds purchased
—
—
—
1
—
—
—
FHLB and other borrowed funds
5,539
5,902
9,541
14,383
14,255
11,441
28,531
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
1,012
1,074
1,346
1,335
1,363
2,086
2,767
Subordinated debentures
4,123
4,124
4,121
4,121
4,122
8,247
8,219
Total interest expense
99,163
97,886
105,572
117,625
115,481
197,049
227,806
Net interest income
219,952
214,656
217,142
215,220
211,822
434,608
416,412
Provision for credit losses on loans
3,000
—
16,700
18,200
8,000
3,000
13,500
Provision for (recovery of) credit losses on unfunded commitments
—
—
—
1,000
—
—
(1,000
)
Recovery of credit losses on investment securities
—
—
—
(330
)
—
—
—
Total credit loss expense
3,000
—
16,700
18,870
8,000
3,000
12,500
Net interest income after credit loss expense
216,952
214,656
200,442
196,350
203,822
431,608
403,912
Non-interest income:
Service charges on deposit accounts
9,552
9,650
9,935
9,888
9,714
19,202
19,400
Other service charges and fees
12,643
10,689
11,651
10,490
10,679
23,332
20,868
Trust fees
5,234
4,760
4,526
4,403
4,722
9,994
9,788
Mortgage lending income
4,780
3,599
3,518
4,437
4,276
8,379
7,834
Insurance commissions
589
535
483
595
565
1,124
1,073
Increase in cash value of life insurance
1,415
1,842
1,215
1,161
1,279
3,257
2,474
Dividends from FHLB, FRB, FNBB & other
2,657
2,718
2,820
2,637
2,998
5,375
6,005
Gain on SBA loans
—
288
218
145
56
288
254
Gain (loss) on branches, equipment and other assets, net
972
(163
)
26
32
2,052
809
2,044
Gain (loss) on OREO, net
13
(376
)
(2,423
)
85
49
(363
)
66
Fair value adjustment for marketable securities
(238
)
442
850
1,392
(274
)
204
729
Other income
13,462
11,442
8,403
7,514
6,658
24,904
14,038
Total non-interest income
51,079
45,426
41,222
42,779
42,774
96,505
84,573
Non-interest expense:
Salaries and employee benefits
64,318
61,855
60,824
58,861
60,427
126,173
121,337
Occupancy and equipment
14,023
14,425
14,526
14,546
14,408
28,448
28,959
Data processing expense
8,364
8,558
9,324
9,088
8,935
16,922
18,082
Other operating expenses
29,335
28,090
27,536
27,550
29,415
57,425
56,303
Total non-interest expense
116,040
112,928
112,210
110,045
113,185
228,968
224,681
Income before income taxes
151,991
147,154
129,454
129,084
133,411
299,145
263,804
Income tax expense
33,588
31,945
28,890
29,046
31,881
65,533
62,165
Net income
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Home BancShares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
PER SHARE DATA
Diluted earnings per common share
$
0.60
$
0.58
$
0.51
$
0.50
$
0.51
$
1.18
$
1.00
Diluted earnings per common share, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
0.58
0.56
0.50
0.50
0.52
1.14
1.01
Basic earnings per common share
0.60
0.58
0.51
0.50
0.51
1.18
1.00
Dividends per share – common
0.20
0.195
0.195
0.195
0.18
0.395
0.36
Shareholder buyback yield(2)
0.49
%
0.53
%
0.05
%
0.56
%
0.67
%
1.02
%
1.12
%
Book value per common share
$
20.71
$
20.40
$
19.92
$
19.91
$
19.30
$
20.71
$
19.30
Tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP)(1)
13.44
13.15
12.68
12.67
12.08
13.44
12.08
STOCK INFORMATION
Average common shares outstanding
197,532
198,657
198,863
199,380
200,319
198,091
200,765
Average diluted shares outstanding
197,765
198,852
198,973
199,461
200,465
198,289
200,909
End of period common shares outstanding
197,239
198,206
198,882
198,879
199,746
197,239
199,746
ANNUALIZED PERFORMANCE METRICS
Return on average assets (ROA)
2.08
%
2.07
%
1.77
%
1.74
%
1.79
%
2.08
%
1.78
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted: (ROA, as adjusted) (non-GAAP)(1)
2.02
%
2.01
%
1.76
%
1.72
%
1.83
%
2.02
%
1.79
%
Return on average assets excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
2.25
%
2.24
%
1.92
%
1.88
%
1.94
%
2.25
%
1.93
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
2.18
%
2.18
%
1.91
%
1.86
%
1.98
%
2.18
%
1.94
%
Return on average common equity (ROE)
11.77
%
11.75
%
10.13
%
10.23
%
10.73
%
11.76
%
10.69
%
Return on average common equity, as adjusted: (ROE, as adjusted) (non-GAAP)(1)
11.39
%
11.41
%
10.05
%
10.12
%
10.98
%
11.40
%
10.76
%
Return on average tangible common equity (ROTCE) (non-GAAP)(1)
18.26
%
18.39
%
15.94
%
16.26
%
17.29
%
18.33
%
17.26
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted: (ROTCE, as adjusted) (non-GAAP)(1)
17.68
%
17.87
%
15.82
%
16.09
%
17.69
%
17.77
%
17.38
%
Return on average tangible common equity excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
18.50
%
18.64
%
16.18
%
16.51
%
17.56
%
18.57
%
17.53
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
17.92
%
18.12
%
16.07
%
16.34
%
17.97
%
18.02
%
17.66
%
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
(2) Calculation of this metric is included in the schedules accompanying this release.
Home BancShares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
Efficiency ratio
41.68
%
42.22
%
42.24
%
41.42
%
43.17
%
41.94
%
43.69
%
Efficiency ratio, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
42.01
%
42.84
%
42.00
%
41.66
%
42.59
%
42.42
%
43.50
%
Net interest margin – FTE (NIM)
4.44
%
4.44
%
4.39
%
4.28
%
4.27
%
4.44
%
4.20
%
Fully taxable equivalent adjustment
$
2,526
$
2,534
$
2,398
$
2,616
$
2,628
$
5,060
$
3,520
Total revenue (net)
271,031
260,082
258,364
257,999
254,596
531,113
500,985
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR) (non-GAAP)(1)
154,991
147,154
146,154
147,954
141,411
302,145
276,304
PPNR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
150,404
142,821
145,209
146,562
141,886
293,225
275,614
Pre-tax net income to total revenue (net)
56.08
%
56.58
%
50.11
%
50.03
%
52.40
%
56.32
%
52.66
%
Pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net) (non-GAAP)(1)
54.39
%
54.91
%
49.74
%
49.49
%
52.59
%
54.64
%
52.52
%
P5NR (Pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage) (PPNR to total revenue (net)) (non-GAAP)(1)
57.19
%
56.58
%
56.57
%
57.35
%
55.54
%
56.89
%
55.15
%
P5NR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
55.49
%
54.91
%
56.20
%
56.81
%
55.73
%
55.21
%
55.01
%
Total purchase accounting accretion
$
1,233
$
1,378
$
1,610
$
1,878
$
1,873
$
2,611
$
4,645
Average purchase accounting loan discounts
16,219
17,493
19,090
20,832
22,788
16,873
23,813
OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES
Advertising
$
2,054
$
1,928
$
1,941
$
1,810
$
1,692
$
3,982
$
3,346
Amortization of intangibles
2,025
2,047
2,068
2,095
2,140
4,072
4,280
Electronic banking expense
3,172
3,055
3,307
3,569
3,412
6,227
6,568
Directors’ fees
431
452
356
362
423
883
921
Due from bank service charges
283
281
271
302
282
564
558
FDIC and state assessment
1,636
3,387
3,216
3,360
5,494
5,023
8,812
Insurance
1,049
999
900
926
905
2,048
1,808
Legal and accounting
2,360
3,641
2,361
1,902
2,617
6,001
4,698
Other professional fees
2,211
1,947
1,736
2,062
2,108
4,158
4,344
Operating supplies
711
711
711
673
613
1,422
1,296
Postage
488
503
518
522
497
991
1,020
Telephone
419
436
438
455
444
855
914
Other expense
12,496
8,703
9,713
9,512
8,788
21,199
17,738
Total other operating expenses
$
29,335
$
28,090
$
27,536
$
27,550
$
29,415
$
57,425
$
56,303
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
Home BancShares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)
(Dollars in thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
BALANCE SHEET RATIOS
Total loans to total deposits
86.80
%
85.24
%
86.11
%
88.74
%
87.18
%
Common equity to assets
17.83
%
17.58
%
17.61
%
17.35
%
16.82
%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP)(1)
12.35
%
12.09
%
11.98
%
11.78
%
11.23
%
.
LOANS RECEIVABLE
Real estate
Commercial real estate loans
Non-farm/non-residential
$
5,553,182
$
5,588,681
$
5,426,780
$
5,496,536
$
5,599,925
Construction/land development
2,695,561
2,735,760
2,736,214
2,741,419
2,511,817
Agricultural
315,926
335,437
336,993
335,965
345,461
Residential real estate loans
Residential 1-4 family
2,138,990
1,947,872
1,956,489
1,932,352
1,910,143
Multifamily residential
620,439
576,089
496,484
482,648
509,091
Total real estate
11,324,098
11,183,839
10,952,960
10,988,920
10,876,437
Consumer
1,218,834
1,227,745
1,234,361
1,219,197
1,189,386
Commercial and industrial
2,107,326
2,045,036
2,022,775
2,084,667
2,242,072
Agricultural
323,457
314,323
367,251
352,963
314,600
Other
206,909
181,173
187,153
178,232
158,962
Loans receivable
$
15,180,624
$
14,952,116
$
14,764,500
$
14,823,979
$
14,781,457
ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES
Balance, beginning of period
$
279,944
$
275,880
$
312,574
$
295,856
$
290,294
Loans charged off
4,071
3,458
53,959
2,001
3,098
Recoveries of loans previously charged off
2,996
7,522
565
519
660
Net loans charged off (recovered)
1,075
(4,064
)
53,394
1,482
2,438
Provision for credit losses – loans
3,000
—
16,700
18,200
8,000
Balance, end of period
$
281,869
$
279,944
$
275,880
$
312,574
$
295,856
Net charge-offs (recoveries) to average total loans
0.03
%
(0.11
)%
1.44
%
0.04
%
0.07
%
Allowance for credit losses to total loans
1.86
%
1.87
%
1.87
%
2.11
%
2.00
%
NON-PERFORMING ASSETS
Non-performing loans
Non-accrual loans
$
89,261
$
86,383
$
93,853
$
95,747
$
78,090
Loans past due 90 days or more
7,031
3,264
5,034
5,356
8,251
Total non-performing loans
96,292
89,647
98,887
101,103
86,341
Other non-performing assets
Foreclosed assets held for sale, net
41,529
39,680
43,407
43,040
41,347
Other non-performing assets
—
63
63
63
63
Total other non-performing assets
41,529
39,743
43,470
43,103
41,410
Total non-performing assets
$
137,821
$
129,390
$
142,357
$
144,206
$
127,751
Allowance for credit losses for loans to non-performing loans
292.72
%
312.27
%
278.99
%
309.16
%
342.66
%
Non-performing loans to total loans
0.63
%
0.60
%
0.67
%
0.68
%
0.58
%
Non-performing assets to total assets
0.60
%
0.56
%
0.63
%
0.63
%
0.56
%
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated Net Interest Margin
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended
June 30, 2025
March 31, 2025
(Dollars in thousands)
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
ASSETS
Earning assets
Interest-bearing balances due from banks
$
813,833
$
8,951
4.41
%
$
611,962
$
6,620
4.39
%
Federal funds sold
4,878
53
4.36
%
5,091
55
4.38
%
Investment securities – taxable
3,095,764
26,444
3.43
%
3,179,290
27,433
3.50
%
Investment securities – non-taxable – FTE
1,113,044
10,033
3.62
%
1,135,783
10,061
3.59
%
Loans receivable – FTE
15,055,414
276,160
7.36
%
14,893,912
270,907
7.38
%
Total interest-earning assets
20,082,933
321,641
6.42
%
19,826,038
315,076
6.45
%
Non-earning assets
2,714,805
2,722,797
Total assets
$
22,797,738
$
22,548,835
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Liabilities
Interest-bearing liabilities
Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts
$
11,541,641
$
71,042
2.47
%
$
11,402,688
$
69,672
2.48
%
Time deposits
1,886,147
17,447
3.71
%
1,801,503
17,114
3.85
%
Total interest-bearing deposits
13,427,788
88,489
2.64
%
13,204,191
86,786
2.67
%
Federal funds purchased
46
—
—
%
—
—
—
%
Securities sold under agreement to repurchase
143,752
1,012
2.82
%
155,861
1,074
2.79
%
FHLB and other borrowed funds
566,984
5,539
3.92
%
600,681
5,902
3.98
%
Subordinated debentures
439,027
4,123
3.77
%
439,173
4,124
3.81
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
14,577,597
99,163
2.73
%
14,399,906
97,886
2.76
%
Non-interest bearing liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits
3,981,901
3,980,944
Other liabilities
202,085
190,314
Total liabilities
18,761,583
18,571,164
Shareholders’ equity
4,036,155
3,977,671
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
$
22,797,738
$
22,548,835
Net interest spread
3.69
%
3.69
%
Net interest income and margin – FTE
$
222,478
4.44
%
$
217,190
4.44
%
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated Net Interest Margin
(Unaudited)
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2025
June 30, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
ASSETS
Earning assets
Interest-bearing balances due from banks
$
713,455
$
15,571
4.40
%
$
865,686
$
23,092
5.36
%
Federal funds sold
4,984
108
4.37
%
4,718
120
5.11
%
Investment securities – taxable
3,137,296
53,877
3.46
%
3,459,639
65,816
3.83
%
Investment securities – non-taxable – FTE
1,124,351
20,094
3.60
%
1,221,431
18,896
3.11
%
Loans receivable – FTE
14,975,109
547,067
7.37
%
14,568,029
539,814
7.45
%
Total interest-earning assets
19,955,195
636,717
6.43
%
20,119,503
647,738
6.47
%
Non-earning assets
2,718,779
2,660,101
Total assets
$
22,673,974
$
22,779,604
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Liabilities
Interest-bearing liabilities
Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts
$
11,472,548
$
140,713
2.47
%
$
11,078,749
$
153,525
2.79
%
Time deposits
1,844,059
34,562
3.78
%
1,708,902
34,764
4.09
%
Total interest-bearing deposits
13,316,607
175,275
2.65
%
12,787,651
188,289
2.96
%
Federal funds purchased
23
—
—
%
17
—
—
%
Securities sold under agreement to repurchase
149,773
2,086
2.81
%
165,962
2,767
3.35
%
FHLB and other borrowed funds
583,739
11,441
3.95
%
1,301,071
28,531
4.41
%
Subordinated debentures
439,100
8,247
3.79
%
439,686
8,219
3.76
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
14,489,242
197,049
2.74
%
14,694,387
227,806
3.12
%
Non-interest bearing liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits
3,981,425
4,050,787
Other liabilities
196,232
239,704
Total liabilities
18,666,899
18,984,878
Shareholders’ equity
4,007,075
3,794,726
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
$
22,673,974
$
22,779,604
Net interest spread
3.69
%
3.35
%
Net interest income and margin – FTE
$
439,668
4.44
%
$
419,932
4.20
%
Home BancShares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Reconciliations
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
EARNINGS, AS ADJUSTED
GAAP net income available to common shareholders (A)
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Pre-tax adjustments
FDIC special assessment
(1,516
)
—
—
—
2,260
(1,516
)
2,260
BOLI death benefits
(1,243
)
—
(95
)
—
—
(1,243
)
(162
)
Gain on sale of premises and equipment
(983
)
—
—
—
(2,059
)
(983
)
(2,059
)
Fair value adjustment for marketable securities
238
(442
)
(850
)
(1,392
)
274
(204
)
(729
)
Special income from equity investment
(3,498
)
(3,891
)
—
—
—
(7,389
)
—
Legal fee reimbursement
(885
)
—
—
—
—
(885
)
—
Legal claims expense
3,300
—
—
—
—
3,300
—
Total pre-tax adjustments
(4,587
)
(4,333
)
(945
)
(1,392
)
475
(8,920
)
(690
)
Tax-effect of adjustments
(817
)
(1,059
)
(208
)
(348
)
119
(1,876
)
(132
)
Deferred tax asset write-down
—
—
—
—
2,030
—
2,030
Total adjustments after-tax (B)
(3,770
)
(3,274
)
(737
)
(1,044
)
2,386
(7,044
)
1,472
Earnings, as adjusted (C)
$
114,633
$
111,935
$
99,827
$
98,994
$
103,916
$
226,568
$
203,111
Average diluted shares outstanding (D)
197,765
198,852
198,973
199,461
200,465
198,289
200,909
GAAP diluted earnings per share: (A/D)
$
0.60
$
0.58
$
0.51
$
0.50
$
0.51
$
1.18
$
1.00
Adjustments after-tax: (B/D)
(0.02
)
(0.02
)
(0.01
)
0.00
0.01
(0.04
)
0.01
Diluted earnings per common share, as adjusted: (C/D)
$
0.58
$
0.56
$
0.50
$
0.50
$
0.52
$
1.14
$
1.01
ANNUALIZED RETURN ON AVERAGE ASSETS
Return on average assets: (A/E)
2.08
%
2.07
%
1.77
%
1.74
%
1.79
%
2.08
%
1.78
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted: (ROA, as adjusted) ((A+D)/E)
2.02
%
2.01
%
1.76
%
1.72
%
1.83
%
2.02
%
1.79
%
Return on average assets excluding intangible amortization: ((A+C)/(E-F))
2.25
%
2.24
%
1.92
%
1.88
%
1.94
%
2.25
%
1.93
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization: ((A+C+D)/(E-F))
2.18
%
2.18
%
1.91
%
1.86
%
1.98
%
2.18
%
1.94
%
GAAP net income available to common shareholders (A)
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Amortization of intangibles (B)
2,025
2,047
2,068
2,095
2,140
4,072
4,280
Amortization of intangibles after-tax (C)
1,530
1,547
1,563
1,572
1,605
3,077
3,210
Adjustments after-tax (D)
(3,770
)
(3,274
)
(737
)
(1,044
)
2,386
(7,044
)
1,472
Average assets (E)
22,797,738
22,548,835
22,565,077
22,893,784
22,875,949
22,673,974
22,779,604
Average goodwill & core deposit intangible (F)
1,435,480
1,437,515
1,439,566
1,441,654
1,443,778
1,436,492
1,444,840
Home BancShares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Reconciliations
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
ANNUALIZED RETURN ON AVERAGE COMMON EQUITY
Return on average common equity: (A/D)
11.77
%
11.75
%
10.13
%
10.23
%
10.73
%
11.76
%
10.69
%
Return on average common equity, as adjusted: (ROE, as adjusted) ((A+C)/D)
11.39
%
11.41
%
10.05
%
10.12
%
10.98
%
11.40
%
10.76
%
Return on average tangible common equity: (ROTCE) (A/(D-E))
18.26
%
18.39
%
15.94
%
16.26
%
17.29
%
18.33
%
17.26
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted: (ROTCE, as adjusted) ((A+C)/(D-E))
17.68
%
17.87
%
15.82
%
16.09
%
17.69
%
17.77
%
17.38
%
Return on average tangible common equity excluding intangible amortization: (B/(D-E))
18.50
%
18.64
%
16.18
%
16.51
%
17.56
%
18.57
%
17.53
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization: ((B+C)/(D-E))
17.92
%
18.12
%
16.07
%
16.34
%
17.97
%
18.02
%
17.66
%
GAAP net income available to common shareholders (A)
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Earnings excluding intangible amortization (B)
119,933
116,756
102,127
101,610
103,135
236,689
204,849
Adjustments after-tax (C)
(3,770
)
(3,274
)
(737
)
(1,044
)
2,386
(7,044
)
1,472
Average common equity (D)
4,036,155
3,977,671
3,950,176
3,889,712
3,805,800
4,007,075
3,794,726
Average goodwill & core deposits intangible (E)
1,435,480
1,437,515
1,439,566
1,441,654
1,443,778
1,436,492
1,444,840
EFFICIENCY RATIO & P5NR
Efficiency ratio: ((D-G)/(B+C+E))
41.68
%
42.22
%
42.24
%
41.42
%
43.17
%
41.94
%
43.69
%
Efficiency ratio, as adjusted: ((D-G-I)/(B+C+E-H))
42.01
%
42.84
%
42.00
%
41.66
%
42.59
%
42.42
%
43.50
%
Pre-tax net income to total revenue (net) (A/(B+C))
56.08
%
56.58
%
50.11
%
50.03
%
52.40
%
56.32
%
52.66
%
Pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net) ((A+F)/(B+C))
54.39
%
54.91
%
49.74
%
49.49
%
52.59
%
54.64
%
52.52
%
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR) (B+C-D)
$
154,991
$
147,154
$
146,154
$
147,954
$
141,411
$
302,145
$
276,304
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income, as adjusted (B+C-D+F)
$
150,404
$
142,821
$
145,209
$
146,562
$
141,886
$
293,225
$
275,614
P5NR (Pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage) PPNR to total revenue (net)) (B+C-D)/(B+C)
57.19
%
56.58
%
56.57
%
57.35
%
55.54
%
56.89
%
55.15
%
P5NR, as adjusted (B+C-D+F)/(B+C)
55.49
%
54.91
%
56.20
%
56.81
%
55.73
%
55.21
%
55.01
%
Pre-tax net income (A)
$
151,991
$
147,154
$
129,454
$
129,084
$
133,411
$
299,145
$
263,804
Net interest income (B)
219,952
214,656
217,142
215,220
211,822
434,608
416,412
Non-interest income (C)
51,079
45,426
41,222
42,779
42,774
96,505
84,573
Non-interest expense (D)
116,040
112,928
112,210
110,045
113,185
228,968
224,681
Fully taxable equivalent adjustment (E)
2,526
2,534
2,398
2,616
2,628
5,060
3,520
Total pre-tax adjustments (F)
(4,587
)
(4,333
)
(945
)
(1,392
)
475
(8,920
)
(690
)
Amortization of intangibles (G)
2,025
2,047
2,068
2,095
2,140
4,072
4,280
Adjustments:
Non-interest income:
Fair value adjustment for marketable securities
$
(238
)
$
442
$
850
$
1,392
$
(274
)
$
204
$
729
Gain (loss) on OREO
13
(376
)
(2,423
)
85
49
(363
)
66
Gain (loss) on branches, equipment and other assets, net
972
(163
)
26
32
2,052
809
2,044
Special income from equity investment
3,498
3,891
—
—
—
7,389
—
BOLI death benefits
1,243
—
95
—
—
1,243
162
Legal expense reimbursement
885
—
—
—
—
885
—
Total non-interest income adjustments (H)
$
6,373
$
3,794
$
(1,452
)
$
1,509
$
1,827
$
10,167
$
3,001
Non-interest expense:
FDIC special assessment
(1,516
)
—
—
—
2,260
(1,516
)
2,260
Legal claims expense
3,300
—
—
—
—
3,300
—
Total non-interest expense adjustments (I)
$
1,784
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
2,260
$
1,784
$
2,260
Home BancShares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Reconciliations
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
TANGIBLE BOOK VALUE PER COMMON SHARE
Book value per common share: (A/B)
$
20.71
$
20.40
$
19.92
$
19.91
$
19.30
Tangible book value per common share: ((A-C-D)/B)
13.44
13.15
12.68
12.67
12.08
Total stockholders’ equity (A)
$
4,085,316
$
4,042,555
$
3,961,025
$
3,959,789
$
3,855,503
End of period common shares outstanding (B)
197,239
198,206
198,882
198,879
199,746
Goodwill (C)
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
Core deposit and other intangibles (D)
36,255
38,280
40,327
42,395
44,490
TANGIBLE COMMON EQUITY TO TANGIBLE ASSETS
Equity to assets: (B/A)
17.83
%
17.58
%
17.61
%
17.35
%
16.82
%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets: ((B-C-D)/(A-C-D))
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Two papers published in NEJM look at the use of mitochondrial donation an preimplantation genetic testing for mitochondrial disease.
Dr David J Clancy, Lecturer in Biogerontology, Lancaster University, said:
“This comment is to discuss Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy (MRT) in terms of costs and benefits in light of what we now know.
Benefits
“Mitochondrial replacement therapy allows women with pathogenic mitochondrial DNA to have a baby which bears her own chromosomes, while reducing or replacing the pathogenic mtDNA. If the primary purpose is to avoid mitochondrial disease, then women could also have IVF by donor sperm or donor egg (or donor embryo), or they might choose adoption if IVF technologies don’t suit them for clinical or personal reasons.
“In chromosomal dominant diseases like Huntington’s disease, affected people are offered pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT) and they are also offered IVF using donor eggs or embryos if the patient is a woman. For these sorts of genetic disease there is currently no alternative. In these cases a woman cannot have a child bearing her own chromosomes.
“When having a family there are two ways to break genetic lineages – inheritance down generations: one is to adopt and another is to have IVF by donor sperm or donor egg (or donor embryo). It is difficult to value genetic lineage. It will be more valuable to some, less to others. While maternity is never in doubt, paternity often is. Perhaps we should then value maternal genetic lineage more than paternal. Mitochondrial replacement therapy allows unbroken maternal lineage.
I cannot determine whether the Mitochondrial Reproductive Advice Clinic suggests IVF by donor egg or embryo (or adoption). The paper says “Patients with heteroplasmy (part pathogenic mitochondrial DNA, part healthy) were offered PGT, and patients with homoplasmy or elevated heteroplasmy (all or mostly pathogenic mitochondrial DNA) were offered pronuclear transfer.”
Costs
“The money cost is presumably significant. The work was funded by Wellcome and NHS England and carried out by Newcastle University, UK and the Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Presumably they could give an idea of the cost. This might be considered important, in an environment of limited resources for national healthcare.
Possible harms
“Because these babies would not exist without the MRT intervention, we want to know about possible problems; in medicine the saying is “First, do no harm”, though in current healthcare, harm is often inevitable. While the babies so far seem probably unaffected, assessing the potential for future harm as they develop by looking at the degree of heteroplasmy in the infants is a large part of the reason for the publications.
“Measurements were on white blood cells so we don’t know about tissue mosaicism, which is where you can have high heteroplasmy in some tissues and low in others, and is common in many mitochondrial diseases. In tissues demanding high energy production (e.g. neurons), lower levels of heteroplasmy can still be symptomatic. In a mouse model, a proportion of >20% energy-deficient neurons in the brain was necessary for observable symptoms.
“Three of eight newborns from MRT had heteroplasmy levels of 5%, 12%, and 16% (the other five were
“All of these things were mostly known before these publications, so apparently the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA), who approved it, is happy with the cost-benefit ratio. It also appears that other countries also approve, because the technique is spreading; there is a clinic in North Cyprus, and Prof Mary Herbert, the study’s lead, has moved to a pioneer institution in IVF, Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, partly to introduce a mitochondrial replacement program.”
Prof Joanna Poulton, Professor and Honorary Consultant in Mitochondrial Genetics, Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, said:
“From this study, it isn’t clear that MD (mitochondrial donation) has any advantage over PGT (pre-implantation genetic testing, an alternative strategy) for heteroplasmic mtDNA disorders (where patients have mixtures of normal and mutant mtDNA and severity depends on the “dose” of mutant). The “take home baby” rate and the reduction in mutant load is similar (if anything less good for MD).
“MD has a clear theoretical advantage for homoplasmic disorders (where the mother’s mtDNA is 100% mutant), because while PGT while can be used to reduce risk, it cannot be used to reduce the load of mutant mtDNA. Over half of the MD children were from Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy (LHON) families, where the chance of male offspring going blind in adolescence is around 20% but only 4% for females. The risk of blindness can be reduced 5 fold using PGT to select female embryos, but they risk transmitting it to their children. Happily, male identical twins were born by MD with undetectable mutant mtDNA, they will be very low risk for blindness and as males, they will not transmit the problem to their children (because LHON is a maternally transmitted disorder). Slightly worryingly, one baby from a m.4300A>G family, where the mother has a heart disorder (cardiomyopathy) for which she may ultimately need a heart transplant, has an unspecified heart defect: they conclude it is probably unrelated to m.4300A>G but this remains uncertain. Another from a m.3260A>G family had a mutant load of 16% in blood. While this probably means the risk of symptoms is low, one symptomatic m.3260A>G woman had a blood level that was lower than this (11% with 81% in muscle). Happily, male identical twins were born by MD with undetectable mutant mtDNA, they will be very low risk for blindness and as males, they will not transmit the problem to their children because LHON is a maternally transmitted disorder.
“A great deal of research funding has been channelled into the centre that has developed MD. While this has generated fascinating scientific data and this treatment option is now available on the NHS, it hasn’t yet resulted in a dramatic clinical advance. Time will tell.”
Prof Dusko Ilic, Professor of Stem Cell Science, King’s College London, said:
“A remarkable accomplishment! State-of-the-art technology. Kudos to the team!”
Prof Dagan Wells,Professor of Reproductive Genetics, University of Oxford, and Director, Juno Genetics, Oxford, said:
“This is an important study which has been eagerly anticipated ever since the first license to carry out mitochondrial replacement therapy to avoid mitochondrial disease was granted eight years ago.
“The results indicate that established methods for avoiding mitochondrial DNA diseases, such as preimplantation genetic testing, perform well and will be suitable for most women at risk of having an affected child.
“A minority of patients are unable to produce any embryos free of mitochondrial disease, and for those women the study provides hope that they may be able to have healthy children in the future.
“The treatment has succeeded in producing 8 babies, and although mitochondrial DNA mutations can be detected in the cells of most of the children, the great majority of their mitochondria are functional, and consequently they do not have mitochondrial disease.
“The published results are very valuable, but some scientists will be a little disappointed that so much time and effort has, so far, only led to the birth of 8 children.
“Larger studies will be needed to truly understand the value of mitochondrial replacement therapy, and to understand whether there are any risks associated with the treatment.
“Three of the eight children born have some evidence of ‘reversal’, a phenomenon where the therapy initially succeeds in producing an embryo with very few defective mitochondria, but by the time the child is born the proportion of abnormal mitochondria in its cells has significantly increased.
“It is not understood why reversal sometimes occurs. Taking data from the new study as well as previous research, it seems that it may affect as many as one-third of embryos produced using mitochondrial replacement therapy. Importantly, all the children in the study have low levels of abnormal mitochondria in their cells, including those where a degree of reversal has occurred. However, the fact that reversal can happen suggests there is a chance that mitochondrial replacement therapy might occasionally fail, and consequently the procedure should be seen as a way of reducing the risk of mitochondrial disease inheritance, not guaranteeing it.”
Dr Andy Greenfield, Honorary Fellow at the Nuffield Department of Women’s & Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, said:
“Mitochondria are the energy-producing organelles of the body’s cells. They contain DNA (mitochondrial DNA, mtDNA) and as such are prone to changes to that DNA (mutations) that can disrupt mitochondrial function and cause disease. The paper by Hyslop et al describes the first clinical use in the UK of a technique – mitochondrial donation (MD) – aimed at reducing the risk of transmitting a class of mitochondrial diseases (mtDNA diseases) from mother to offspring. This is an often devastating and life-limiting group of diseases for which no curative treatments exist. The specific technique described, based on IVF, is pronuclear transfer (PNT), one of the two MD techniques made lawful in the UK in 2015. The last preclinical review of the safety and effectiveness of MD, commissioned by the HFEA and published in 2016, recommended its clinical use as a risk reduction strategy – to be used only in those women for whom preimplantation genetic testing (PGT, an established procedure that is used to detect genetic abnormalities, including the amount of disease-causing (pathogenic) mtDNA, in an embryo) followed by selection of an embryo with low levels of pathogenic mtDNA for transfer was unlikely to be a successful strategy i.e. only in those women with high levels of pathogenic mtDNA (elevated heteroplasmy) in all eggs or with exclusively pathogenic mtDNA in their eggs (homoplasmy). This cautious approach is at the heart of this new report, which, along with an accompanying paper by McFarland et al, assesses MD alongside PGT in an integrated programme performed at Newcastle Fertility Centre, UK, under the regulatory framework developed by the HFEA.
“Whilst PGT for mtDNA is an established procedure that acts as a useful comparator, the attention here will be rightly focused on the MD clinical data: 22 women at high risk of transmitting mitochondrial disease to their offspring were treated using PNT, resulting in 8 live births and one ongoing pregnancy. Firstly, this headline result alone is highly significant: PNT is compatible with embryo viability in humans. Secondly, levels of pathogenic mtDNA (in blood) from the infants varied from 0% to 16%. Whilst the last figure hints at a degree of reversion to the maternal mtDNA type, it is also sufficiently low to conclude that the procedure has successfully reduced the risk of mtDNA in all children born. The amount of maternal mtDNA could, however, vary from tissue to tissue and so follow-up of these children is vitally important. McFarland et al report that none of the children has any health condition that could be straightforwardly attributed to the presence of mtDNA disease. As the authors note, there are reasons to be optimistic about the outcome of this first MD treatment in the UK.
“The data in the last paragraph, whilst summarised very briefly, are the culmination of decades of work: from the earliest investigations in mice aimed at understanding the impacts of nuclear transfer, through to targeted experiments in human embryos to provide preclinical evidence of safety and effectiveness. But this is to focus only on some of the scientific/technical challenges that have been overcome. There were parallel activities over a similar time frame concerning ethical inquiry, public and patient engagement, law-making, drafting of regulations and execution of those regulations by committees. And last but not least: the careful establishment of a clinical pathway by which the health of the mothers and infants born could be monitored and they could be cared for (detailed in McFarland et al). This all represents a vast amount of work by a large number of people over a long period.
“The Hyslop et al paper itself is a treasure trove of data, which will likely to be the starting points of new avenues of research and opportunities for refinement. What is the explanation for the somewhat elevated maternal mtDNA levels (still beneath the clinical threshold for disease) detected in two babies born following PNT? Further studies of mitochondrial DNA replication, segregation and interaction with the nuclear DNA may provide clues. The reduction in normally fertilized eggs in the PNT group also requires explanation and may indicate that some mtDNA pathogenic variants can compromise fertilisation of the egg, which is an energy-demanding process. This observation opens up a whole area of research concerning the role of played by mitochondria in fertility. Of course, numbers analysed here are still low and a larger and more diverse cohort will be required to draw firm conclusions about efficacy and safety of MD at a population level. We can look forward to future assessments of maternal spindle transfer (the other lawful MD technique in the UK) and even, possibly, the use of targeted, enzymatic degradation of pathogenic mtDNA to eliminate the risk of carry-over and reversion.
“How do we summarise what this all means? It is a triumph of scientific innovation in the IVF clinic – a world-first that shows that the UK is an excellent environment in which to push boundaries in IVF; a tour de force by the embryologists who painstakingly developed and optimised the micromanipulation methods; an example of the value of clinical expertise, developed over decades of working with children and adults suffering from these devastating diseases, being used to support a new intervention and subsequent follow-up, potentially for many years. And it is so much more, depending on whether one’s perspective is that of an historian, sociologist, ethicist or philosopher. It is tempting to suggest that this report marks the end of a process – but it is actually the beginning, of a new era in which technologies that change how we think about human reproduction are introduced into a tightly regulated environment – the only way in which they should be introduced.
“In time, there will no doubt be retrospective studies and assessments of how all this was done – some critical – and there will be much to learn. It is hoped that other papers will follow, detailing different aspects of the process by which these first UK children were born, because this whole exercise has been a steep learning curve for all involved and future progress relies on such learning being shared. Safety assessment should be at the heart of all these and future reports. Some may wonder about the time taken for these current reports to see the light of day – but that would be to underestimate what is required to transition from preclinical research activities in an academic setting to offering a bona fide clinical service on the NHS (with the spanner of COVID-19 thrown into the works for good measure). Others will wonder whether supporting the desire to have biological children merits all this time and effort, when ‘unmet clinical need’ is the focus and budgetary constraints are the norm. But this evaluation unnecessarily attempts to marginalise a human activity – ‘having children’ – that is actually central to the health and wellbeing of a significant proportion of the population. And those ordinary resemblances that parents and children often share also matter to them. Of course, the results of clinical follow-up of the children born using PNT will be a major determinant of the future prospects for mitochondrial donation in the IVF clinic, as this report acknowledges.
“There will be many responses to this work, but I see these reports, despite their matter-of-fact understatement, as an extraordinary reminder of what well intentioned science, collaborating with medicine, can do to improve the lives of human beings.”
Mr Stuart Lavery, Divisional Clinical Director Women’s Health and Consultant in Reproductive Medicine/Honorary Associate Professor, University College Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, said:
“The concept of nuclear transfer has attracted much commentary and occasionally concern and anxiety.
“The Newcastle team have demonstrated that it can be used in a clinically effective and ethically acceptable way to prevent disease and suffering.
“The HFEA has shown that regulation need not always be restrictive, and that permissive regulation can lead to innovation at the highest level, allowing scientists to push boundaries, patients to be successfully treated and the public to be reassured.
“This truly represents the very best of British science and regulation.”
Prof Bert Smeets, Professor in Clinical Genomics with focus on Mitochondrial Diseases, said:
“These are papers, the scientific community has waited for, for a long time, as they describe the experience of the Newcastle team on pronuclear transfer to prevent the transmission of mtDNA disease, for which they got approval in 2017. The papers describe the current experience in PNT and PGT for preventing the transmission of mtDNA disease. It is good to present a reproductive care pathway, although it is not fully complete and some of the criteria might be reevaluated based on the presented data. The care pathway starts with carriers of mtDNA mutations. I would also include women who have affected children with de novo mtDNA mutations. This concerns about 25% of the mtDNA patients. The recurrence risk is low and generally prenatal diagnosis is offered for reassurance. Furthermore, women with a very low mtDNA mutation load, with skewing mtDNA mutations or large scale deletions could also opt for prenatal diagnosis. For a reproductive care pathway for mtDNA disease, these groups should be included as well. It is clear that for the remainder according to the HFEA guidelines PNT should only be offered if PGT is unsuitable. It is great that the PNT as an addition to the reproductive choices for mtDNA disease seems to deliver as 8 children without the mtDNA condition were born. However, there are still concerns, as 2 PNT children had a higher mutation load than the carry-over, which means that reversal can occur and could be a risk for having affected children in future treatments. Also, two children had rare medical complications, which according to the authors were not related to the treatment, as this would then be expected for all of them. I do not think that is true as technical variation occurs and donors will be different. It is good to carefully monitor this, as one of the aims of HFEA guided clinical application is to find-out if PNT by itself is safe, not only to prevent mtDNA disease. The discussion on this is not very strong. Finally, a key unanswered question is why it took so long to come out with these results. Eight births with no mtDNA disease in 7 years deviates largely from the expected150 yearly births, as described by the same group in NEJM in 2015, if all women would opt for this procedure. It seems that the children born are quite recent (only one >18 months), so one wonders if there is a learning curve, change in procedure or whatsoever, explaining the increasing success rate. It would be fair to discuss this in more detail as it would make it much clearer and more realistic which women of the target group will benefit from MD. And that is still a positive message.”
Comments on the broader story:
Kevin McEleny, Chair, British Fertility Society, said:
“These landmark papers provide compelling evidence that mitochondrial donation through pronuclear transfer can massively reduce the transmission of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA variants and are a terrific example of how a regulatory framework can be adapted to permit world-leading scientific discovery. Although the number of babies conceived through this novel treatment is small and their long-term follow-up will be required, the study provides hope to people affected by mitochondrial DNA disease and their loved ones.”
Sarah Norcross, Director of the Progress Educational Trust (PET), said:
“We could not be more delighted by the news that eight babies with donated mitochondria have been born in the UK, and that all of these children have made normal developmental progress.
“Our charity spent many years campaigning for UK law to be changed, to permit the use of mitochondrial donation in treatment. We salute the patients who had the courage to attempt these novel treatments, and we thank the team at Newcastle for justifying patients’ confidence in them.
“Mitochondrial donation will not necessarily be appropriate for every patient who carries disease-causing mitochondrial DNA mutations – rather, its appropriateness depends on various factors that are explored in detail in the new studies. Importantly, the studies place mitochondrial donation within the context of a broader NHS care pathway, that offers a variety of options for people carrying mitochondrial DNA mutations who wish to have children.
“Nonetheless, the studies demonstrate that mitochondrial donation is a feasible option – indeed, a positive reproductive choice – for some patients. An important consideration is that women considering mitochondrial donation are advised to start their fact-finding early, because of the decline of egg quality with age.
“The medical and scientific work at Newcastle, and the policy and legal work that preceded it, have set a high standard for introducing new reproductive technology in a careful and scrupulously regulated way. We are pleased to see that Australia is following a similarly responsible path, having recently introduced its own law that permits the use of mitochondrial donation for the purpose of avoiding mitochondrial disease.
“The work at Newcastle will no doubt inform – and in future, will perhaps also be informed by – the mitoHOPE pilot programme for mitochondrial donation in Australia.”
Nick Meade, Chief Executive Genetic Alliance,said:
“Most rare conditions do not yet have a cure or treatment, so for families affected, reproductive choice techniques are the only opportunities to take control of the impact of the condition. For serious conditions caused by nuclear DNA, these opportunities have existed for many years (through preimplantation genetic testing), with today’s news, we know more families have that opportunity now. These techniques have the potential to work for hundreds of conditions caused by mitochondrial DNA, and they are an example of how innovative research can be applied to take steps forward for multiple rare conditions in parallel. With more than 7,000 rare conditions affecting people in the UK, we need this kind of progress.”
Beth Thompson, Executive Director for Policy & Partnerships at Wellcome, said:
“This is a remarkable scientific achievement, which has been years in the making and we are overjoyed for the families of the eight children born so far.
“The pioneering work behind mitochondrial donation is a powerful example of how discovery research can change lives. The UK has led the way and has demonstrated the importance of science grounded in close and careful co-ordination between researchers, funders and regulators – and, very importantly, working closely with families affected.
“Wellcome has proudly supported this work since the earliest days, including advocating for legislation and licensing. As the science progresses, we will continue championing brave investment in science and for policy and regulation to keep pace. The success of this research should inspire us move forward on other updates, opening the way for further innovation. The groundwork for review of Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, for example, has been done, it now needs to move forward. We must ensure the UK stays a world leader in life sciences.”
Danielle Hamm, Director of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, said:
“Today we have seen the first evidence that for a small number of UK families the use of pronuclear transfer (PNT) to prevent the transfer of maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA disorders has resulted in what everyone hoped it would: children who are thriving and appear free of the devastating symptoms of mitochondrial disease.
“The Nuffield Council on Bioethics’ landmark ethical review of techniques for the prevention of maternally inherited mitochondrial disorders has been instrumental in creating the right regulatory environment to allow this innovative treatment to reach the clinic and change lives for the better.
“The HFEA’s licensing conditions followed our recommendation and ensured that PNT is only available through a specialist centre. The establishment of the NHS Highly Specialised Mitochondrial Reproductive Care Pathway has ensured that families referred to the service are fully supported and have access to appropriate information, and that long term follow up of participants has been secured.
“We welcome this great progress, but continued follow-up is crucially important to inform our understanding of the long-term efficacy of the treatment.”
Peter Thompson, Chief Executive of the HFEA, said:
“Ten years ago, the UK was the first country in the world to licence mitochondrial donation treatment to avoid passing the condition to children. For the first time, families with severe inherited mitochondrial illness have the possibility of a healthy child. Although it’s still early days, it is wonderful news that mitochondrial donation treatment has led to eight babies being born.
“Only people who are at a very high risk of passing a serious mitochondrial disease onto their children are eligible for this treatment in the UK, and every application for mitochondrial donation treatment is individually assessed in accordance with the law. These robust but flexible regulatory processes allow the technique to be used safely for the purposes that Parliament agreed in 2015.”
Prof Frances Flinter, Chair of the HFEA’s Statutory Approvals Committee, said:
“We are pleased to see the peer-reviewed papers published in the New England Journal of Medicine that explain what has happened to those patients who the HFEA authorised to have mitochondrial donation treatment at the Newcastle Centre at Life. These are patients for whom there was no other option to have a healthy baby who is genetically related to them, and we are delighted for those families.
“The HFEA will continue to oversee the safe use of mitochondrial donation treatment and assess each application as families come through the programme. These results are testimony to how the UK continues to be a world leader in the use of new medical techniques to change lives.”
Comment from the editor of the journal the papers are published in (so NOT third party):
Eric Rubin, MD, PhD, Editor-in-Chief, The New England Journal of Medicine, said:
“These studies unite scientific rigor, clinical innovation, and deep ethical reflection to illustrate the full research continuum from bench to bedside. At the New England Journal of Medicine, we chose to publish this work in its full context, not only to highlight the outcomes, but also to surface the critical questions it raises about translating breakthroughs into patient care. Where allowed by government regulations, this research has the potential to prevent serious inherited disease and gives parents truly meaningful new options for their children. Its publication also reminds us that preserving the infrastructure and integrity of biomedical research in the U.S. and around the world is essential if we are to continue delivering such transformative treatments to patients.”
Comments via colleagues at other international SMCs:
Prof. Dr. Marcus Deschauer, Head of the Working Group on Rare Hereditary Neurological Diseases and Senior Physician at the Clinic and Polyclinic for Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), said:
“To my knowledge, this is the first publication of a larger cohort of families/mothers with mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) disorders who have given birth to children after pre-implantation genetic diagnosis or mitochondrial donation. The work is therefore very important for assessing the effectiveness and risks of these methods in practice.”
“Per se, the study includes well-studied families with reliable data, but it was not possible to prevent the transmission of the disease-causing mtDNA variants in all families.””A certain carry-over of mtDNA with a disease-causing variant occurs during pre-cell nucleus transfer. It cannot be ruled out that the proportion of mutated mtDNA will continue to increase over the course of a lifetime after carry-over. However, this is unlikely: for example, in patients with the m.3243A>G variant, the degree of heteroplasmy in the blood decreases over the course of life.“
”The follow-up periods are not yet sufficient to assess the risks of later disease. Manifestation of an mtDNA disease at a later stage is conceivable in children.””A pathological mtDNA variant is identified in women who can pass it on by means of molecular genetic testing if the woman has symptoms of a mitochondriopathy. There are also cases in which molecular genetic diagnostics are performed for another indication – such as the search for another genetic disease – and a pathological mtDNA is detected. However, according to the ACMG recommendations, this should not be disclosed by genetic laboratories.“
”Until now, the lack of data has made it difficult to advise women with mitochondrial diseases on their desire to have children. The DGN guideline ‘Mitochondrial Diseases’ states: ‘Human genetic counselling is particularly complex when it comes to the desire to have children. Prenatal diagnosis can be routinely performed for nuclear mutations, but is more limited for mutations of mitochondrial DNA. The data on preimplantation diagnosis as a means of preventing or reducing the risk of inheritance of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA mutations is extremely limited, and the method is subject to the Preimplantation Diagnosis Ordinance in Germany. These two studies from Newcastle are helpful for counselling.“
”Whether a woman with mtDNA disease can expect an uncomplicated pregnancy also depends on the manifestation/severity of the woman’s disease. In cases of significant muscle weakness (including respiratory muscle weakness), this may increase during pregnancy. Natural childbirth may be difficult, making a caesarean section necessary.”
“If the mitochondrial donation procedure were also permitted in Germany, this would be an option for selected women with an mtDNA disease to significantly reduce the risk of passing on a disease-causing mtDNA variant with a heteroplasmy level above a disease-causing threshold. This would increase the chances of healthy children for families.”
“However, the data from Newcastle do not suggest that the methods used can guarantee that the disease will not be passed on. In some mtDNA variants, the severity of the disease clearly depends on the degree of heteroplasmy in the blood, so that a reduction in the degree of heteroplasmy in such cases could lead to a milder form of the disease in children.”
“In the short term, there are no good therapeutic methods for treating mtDNA diseases, so preventing the transmission of mtDNA diseases is the better option. I also consider it difficult to successfully treat children who have inherited an mtDNA variant in the medium term, as gene therapy must reach the DNA in the mitochondria. There is the example of 5q-associated spinal muscular atrophy, in which infants diagnosed in newborn screening can be treated very successfully. Unfortunately, this is not expected to be the case for mtDNA diseases in the near future.””I consider it unlikely that the two children who were symptomatic have a maternally inherited mitochondriopathy. In the case of the child with epilepsy, I would even classify this as very unlikely. I consider the authors’ assessment that the reproductive technology procedure itself or pregnancy complications or metabolic disorders in the mother may be responsible for the symptoms of the two children to be plausible.”
Nuno Costa-Borges, researcher and embryologist, scientific director and CEO of Embryotools, Barcelona Science Park, says:
“As a pioneering center in mitochondrial replacement therapies (MRT), Embryotools welcomes the recent publication by Hyslop et al. in The New England Journal of Medicine, reporting outcomes from pronuclear transfer (PNT) to prevent the transmission of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) disease. The study reports the birth of eight babies—four girls and four boys, including one set of identical twins—born to seven women at high risk of transmitting severe mtDNA disorders. Importantly, all infants are healthy and show no signs of mitochondrial disease. However, the detection of low-level postnatal mtDNA heteroplasmy (“reversal”) in 3 of the 8 infants (5%–16%) deserves particular discussion.
“Due to UK regulations that prohibit testing for heteroplasmy in embryos, the timing of this reversal could not be pinpointed. Their analysis relied on arrested embryos and blood samples from newborns, which limits interpretation. In contrast, our recent pilot trial using maternal spindle transfer (MST)—a form of MRT where mitochondrial replacement occurs in the oocyte before fertilization—in infertile patients led to seven live births, two of which also showed reversal, a comparable frequency. However, our approach included direct assessment of heteroplasmy in blastocysts and, longitudinally, in multiple tissues including amniotic fluid. This allowed us to accurately define that reversal occurred between the blastocyst stage and mid-gestation (~15 weeks), reinforcing the importance of prenatal testing to detect reversal early and guide clinical decision-making. In our study, all infants are also healthy and have been followed up showing no adverse events.
“This phenomenon—mtDNA ‘reversal’—has previously been described in human cells in vitro but not in MRT-derived children. Minimal levels of maternal mtDNA carryover can expand substantially, potentially compromising the efficacy of MRTs to prevent mitochondrial disease. The biological mechanisms underlying this selective amplification remain unclear but appear to occur early in development, and instances may therefore be detectable using prenatal testing. It is worth noting that the impact of mtDNA reversal in infertility treatments is likely less concerning, as maternal mtDNA in these cases does not carry pathogenic mutations. Moreover, with appropriate matching of mtDNA haplotypes between the mother and donor, the biological consequences of low-level heteroplasmy could be further minimized or even rendered clinically irrelevant.
“Currently, only the UK and Australia have regulated the use of MRT to prevent transmission of mtDNA mutations. We believe that other countries should adopt similar regulatory models. In particular, MRT should also be contemplated for infertility treatment. Infertility is a disease recognized by the WHO, and MRT can offer a genetic link to the mother for patients who would otherwise rely on egg donation. This justification aligns with the ethical principles underpinning MRT for disease prevention. As a pioneer group in this technology, Spain should lead in regulating these applications to ensure patient safety and prevent reproductive tourism to countries where such techniques may be offered without appropriate oversight.
“In light of these findings, we reaffirm the urgent need to continue performing well-regulated, larger, long-term studies to fully evaluate the safety, efficacy, and clinical implications of MRTs. Ongoing research under appropriate oversight is essential to ensure the responsible development of these technologies, improve genetic counseling, and support informed decision-making by patients and clinicians alike.
“We also advocate for thoughtful regulatory evolution that upholds patient autonomy, scientific excellence, and the principle of reproductive justice.”
Dr. Dunja M. Baston-Büst, Deputy Head of the IVF Laboratory, UniCareD Cryobank, and UniKiD Research, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany, said:
“Since there are currently no curative therapies for mitochondrial diseases, advances in assisted reproductive technology open up new possibilities for reducing the transmission of such variants. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis, which is commonly used to detect defects in nuclear DNA, can also be used to identify embryos with a low proportion of maternal pathogenic mitochondrial DNA variants, thereby reducing the risk of disease.
“The replacement of the donor’s zygote pronuclei with the patient’s pronuclei was successful in 127 of 160 cases (79.4 per cent). Of the 127 embryos resulting from this, 122 (96.1 per cent) were still intact on the following day (day 1). The number of intact zygotes per pre-nuclear transfer performed (33 procedures in total) ranged from zero to seven.
“In 37 of the 39 patients (95 per cent) in the preimplantation diagnosis group, the embryos were assessed on the third day after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). For preimplantation diagnosis, a blastomere was biopsied on day three of embryonic development and transfer was usually performed in the fresh cycle after analysis of the mitochondrial DNA from the blastomere.
“Implementation in Germany is not possible under the current legal requirements (Embryo Protection Act), as egg donation is prohibited.
“The earlier and more severe a mitochondrial disease occurs, the earlier patients can be identified. Patients in Germany receive comprehensive human genetic or interdisciplinary counselling in accordance with the current S1 guideline ‘Mitochondrial Diseases’. A decision regarding the options for reproductive measures and possible preimplantation diagnosis is made in consultation with the patients and depending on the degree of heteroplasmy. Pre-implantation genetic screening is not possible in Germany due to the ban on egg donation. The alternatives are egg donation abroad or adoption.
“A patient registry for mitochondrial diseases was established in Germany in 2009. It would be beneficial for reproductive medicine if reproductive outcomes were also collected there, or analysis results if preimplantation diagnosis was performed. Unfortunately, there is no cross-linking between the registries. “Furthermore, the search for biomarkers is generally supported in Germany in order to increase the diagnostic accuracy for mitochondrial diseases.
“For reproductive medicine, I currently see no application of the technology presented in the study in Germany without a comprehensive revision of the Embryo Protection Act and the legalization of egg donation.
“The new EU SOHO Regulation will come into force in the next few years. Its main purpose is to provide greater protection for the genetic background of children born from egg and sperm donation (in addition to the amendments to the sperm donation register), so that many questions will still arise in the case of three-parent constellations.
“In mitochondrial donation using pre-nucleation transfer, the nuclear genome is transferred from a fertilized egg cell of the affected woman to an enucleated, fertilized egg cell from a healthy donor. The pronuclei are removed individually from the patients’ zygotes and, after brief treatment with a fusion agent (haemagglutinating virus from the Japanese shell), are placed together under the zona pellucida (protective shell around the egg cell; editor’s note) of the enucleated donor egg cell. Based on findings from preclinical studies, it is standard practice to freeze (vitrify) the eggs of patients for whom pre-nuclear transfer is planned, as donor eggs are not always available at the same time and in sufficient quantities.
“Pathological variants of mitochondrial DNA can be either homoplasmic (present in all mitochondrial DNA copies) or heteroplasmic (present in only some of the copies). Homoplasmic variants are passed on completely to all offspring, but their expression (penetrance) can vary from individual to individual.
“Clinical pregnancies were confirmed in eight of 22 patients (36 per cent) who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) as part of preimplantation genetic testing, and in 16 of 39 patients (41 per cent) who underwent ICSI as part of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Pronuclear transfer resulted in eight live births and one ongoing pregnancy. PGD resulted in 18 live births.
“Heteroplasmy levels in the blood of the eight infants after pronuclear transfer ranged from undetectable to 16 per cent. Compared to the enucleated zygotes, the proportion of diseased maternal mitochondrial DNA was reduced by 95 to 100 percent in six newborns and by 77 to 88 per cent in two newborns. Heteroplasmy data were also available for ten of the 18 infants after preimplantation genetic diagnosis, with values ranging from undetectable to seven percent.
“For reasons that are still unclear, the small amount of transferred maternal mitochondrial DNA can rise to homoplasmic levels in about 20 per cent of embryonic stem cell lines derived from embryos after mitochondrial donation. In addition, one in six infants born after maternal spindle transfer for the treatment of infertility had elevated heteroplasmy levels (40 to 60 per cent) of maternal mtDNA. These observations raise the question of whether mitochondrial donation can reliably prevent the transmission of diseased mitochondrial DNA in all cases, especially in homoplasmic variants.
“Approximately one in 5,000 people develop a mitochondrial disease, making it one of the most common hereditary diseases, although the symptoms can often vary greatly. The symptoms of mitochondrial diseases are very diverse and can affect various organs, for example the muscles with muscle weakness and pain, the nervous system with encephalopathy, epilepsy and neurological disorders, the heart with heart muscle disease, the eyes with blindness and visual impairment, the ears with hearing loss and the endocrine system with diabetes mellitus.
“Other examples of mitochondriopathies with named syndromes include: autosomal dominant optic atrophy (ADOA) with slowly progressive, usually bilateral, central vision loss; Kearns-Sayre syndrome with cardiac conduction disorders, degenerative changes in the retina, and external ophthalmoplegia; chronic progressive external ophthalmoplegia, which is an incomplete form of Kearns-Sayre syndrome and is characterized by external ophthalmoplegia; MERRF syndrome with cerebellar ataxia, myoclonus, generalized seizures, short stature, and dementia; MELAS syndrome with seizures, dementia, and headaches.
“In addition to the disease entities listed here, there are a number of other, sometimes very rare syndromes that can be classified as mitochondriopathies but have often been little researched or not yet described.”
Dr Holger Prokisch, Head of the Mitochondrial Genetics Research Group, Helmholtz Centre Munich – German Research Centre for Health and Environment, Munich, said:“The field of mitochondrial medicine has been eagerly awaiting the results of this study. The robust data describe a real breakthrough for women with a (nearly) homoplasmic pathogenic mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variant in terms of their ability to probably have healthy genetically related children. The risk of the children to develop the disease after preimplantation genetic testing is minimal. All gene variants tested require very high heteroplasmy for the disease to manifest, or are typically homoplasmic.“”There is an observation in the literature that in a few cases, the mother’s mutated DNA is revised. Interestingly, this also involves an LHON mutation (Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy) [3][4], which is almost always homoplasmic in the population and, according to recent data, has a low penetrance of less than five percent for LHON disease [5](only five percent of gene carriers also develop the disease; editor’s note). In this respect, the selection of mutation carriers for this study with four LHON mutations is not entirely fortunate. The homoplasmy of the LHON variants suggests that they may offer a selective advantage [6]. Since mitochondrial transfer does not eliminate the mutation, there is a risk that the mutation will be passed on to the next generation. This often leads to significant shifts in heteroplasmy, sometimes to the detriment of patients. However, disease-causing variants tend to have a selection pressure [6].“Human studies show no risk of incompatibility between the donor mtDNA and the parents’ nuclear DNA.””There is no newborn screening for mitochondrial DNA mutations. Women are identified as mutation carriers when they or one of their children develop the disease. Prediction or risk assessment for the next generation is difficult for mtDNA mutations in the mother. Many centers for mitochondrial diseases work with the group in Newcastle to provide information about the options available there or to offer preimplantation genetic diagnosis.”[3] Hudson G et al. (2019): Reversion after replacement of mitochondrial DNA. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1623-3. [4] Kang E et al. (2016): Mitochondrial replacement in human oocytes carrying pathogenic mitochondrial DNA mutations. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/nature20592. [5] Mackey DA et al. (2022): Is the disease risk and penetrance in Leber hereditary optic neuropathy actually low?. The American Journal of Human Genetics. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2022.11.014. [6] Kotrys AV et al. (2024): Single-cell analysis reveals context-dependent, cell-level selection of mtDNA. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-07332-0.
Prof. Dr. Nils-Göran Larsson, Group Leader “Maintenance and expression of mtDNA in disease and ageing”, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska-Institut, Stockholm, Schweden, said: “The study in NEJM is very important and represents a breakthrough in mitochondrial medicine. It should be remembered mitochondrial diseases can be devastating and cause substantial suffering in affected children, sometimes leading to an early death. Families are profoundly affected and the paper in NEJM describe how birth of affected children can be prevented by mitochondrial donation.
“This advanced procedure is not a disease-treatment but rather an intervention that minimizes the transmission of mutated mtDNA from mother to child. For affected families this is a very important reproductive option. The paper describes a relatively small series of 8 babies born after mitochondrial donation by pronuclear transfer. The paper is carefully done and of very high quality but as always in science the results need to be confirmed by independent studies. Also, long-term clinical follow-up studies of born babies will give additional information about the safety and efficacy of mitochondrial donation.”
“Before this procedure was applied to human reproduction there was a very long development and evaluation process. There has been a lot of constructive discussion in the scientific community, and the UK Parliament approved legislation allowing mitochondrial donation in 2015.”
“Mitochondrial donation by the pronuclear transfer procedure always leads to carry-over of some mitochondria from the mother and mutant mtDNA can be transferred. The data presented in the NEJM paper shows that mutant mtDNA was not detected in blood of 5 of the born children. However, in three children, low levels of mutant mtDNA were detected in blood. These low levels of mutant mtDNA are unlikely to cause mitochondrial disease but additional follow-up studies are needed. As pointed out by the authors, the mitochondrial donation by pronuclear transfer should be regarded as a risk-reduction strategy. As always, when it comes to new medical procedures there is a need for validation by independent studies. Also, additional long-term follow-up studies of children born after mitochondrial donation will be needed.”
“The authors report that the transferred mtDNA has no mutations and the donor mtDNA is therefore unlikely to cause disease or impact ageing. During normal ageing, mtDNA acquires mutations (somatic mutations), e.g., during the massive cell division when the embryo is formed and develops. These mutations are typically present at low levels but accumulate to high levels in a subset of cells in many different ageing tissues. The mitochondrial donation involves transfer of mtDNA without mutations and there is no reason to believe that the donor mtDNA will additionally impact the ageing process.”
“When it comes disease-causing mtDNA mutations that are present in all copies (i.e., homoplasmic mtDNA mutations) there is currently no alternative to mitochondrial donation to prevent transmission of mutated mtDNA from mother to child. It is possible that alternate methods will be available in the future, e.g., correction of mutant mtDNA by gene editing techniques. There are currently a few promising pharmacological therapies for mitochondrial disease, e.g., nucleoside therapy for mtDNA depletion disorders. It is likely that more treatments will be available in the near future because this field is rapidly developing.”
Prof. Dr. Heidi Mertes, Associate Professor in Medical Ethics, Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Belgien, said:
“I am happy to see that the first results from the Newcastle University group are now finally published, after being granted a license by the HFEA in 2017, and that the eight resulting children are in good health. However, while the results show that the technique is feasible and can lead to a substantial reduction of the mutation load in the resulting children, it also shows that we need to tread very carefully.”
“In line with previous research by the group of Nuno Costa-Borges [1], this research confirms the possibility of reversal (meaning that although there is only a small fraction of the intended mother’s mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in the embryo, this fraction sometimes increases substantially as the foetus develops), which could still result in mitochondrial diseases in the resulting children. Fortunately, preliminary research does indicate that while the mutation loads appear to increase between the embryonic phase and birth, they appear to remain stable after birth.”
“These are very important results as there was a lot of uncertainty over the safety of MRT. Using PGT when possible and reserving MRT for those cases in which PGT cannot offer a solution was a prudent approach given the experimental nature of MRT. It will be interesting to see more data in the future on whether reversal is more frequent in MRT or PGT, so that the safest procedure can be selected.”
“Although the heteroplasmy-levels are limited in this study, it does show that reversal is a real danger for the offspring, which can have serious health implications. At least three things follow from this.”
“First, people entering into this and future clinical trials will need to be extensively counselled that this is not a risk-elimination treatment, but a risk-reduction treatment.” “Second, we need more research into the mechanisms that trigger reversal, so that it can be prevented before this technique is implemented in routine care + We need follow-up research in the children born after MRT.”
“Third, it is important to keep in mind that by framing this as a risk-reduction strategy, we are ignoring the possibility of conceiving through a traditional egg donation procedure. While genetic parenthood is evidently important to many people, the trade-off that we are making here is that between a genetically related child with a high risk of mitochondrial disease (natural conception), a genetically related child with a reduced risk of mitochondrial disease (PGT or MRT) and a non-genetically related child with the near-absence of a risk of mitochondrial disease (through donor conception). If people who would have chosen for donor conception now opt for MRT, this is actually a risk-increasing technology, rather than a risk-reducing one.”
“This strategy lowers the risk of mitochondrial disorders in the children when the point of comparison is natural reproduction by the parents, but the safest option is still donor conception, which eliminates the risk of passing on the mitochondrial condition, rather than reducing it.”
“While the donor plays an essential role in the birth of the child, attributing them a parenthood-status based on a small genetic contribution appears unwarranted. At the same time it would be correct to call them a ‘genetic progenitor’ or ‘genetic contributor’.”
“While the group of Nuno Costa-Borges ([1] [2]) received a lot of backlash for performing their MRT clinical trial in people with repeated IVF failure, rather than people with mitochondrial diseases, we must acknowledge in hindsight that given the phenomenon of reversal, their approach might have been the more prudent one. In their study they observed reversal in one infant going from
Prof David Thorburn, co-Group Leader of Brain & Mitochondrial Research at Murdoch Children’s Research Institute and the University of Melbourne, said:
“Mitochondrial donation was legalised in the UK in 2015 and in Australia in 2022. It was clearly a complex process in the UK to develop the approvals processes, the clinical and lab pathways, cope with delays from COVID and accumulate sufficient outcomes to publish them without impinging on the privacy of the families involved.So it is very exciting to see the first publications describing results for the first 8 babies born in the UK program. The initial results demonstrate that the approach is effective in reducing the risk of having a child with mitochondrial DNA disease for women who are at high risk. For about three quarters of couples participating in the pronuclear transfer method, at least one suitable embryo was generated. About 40% of these couples had a baby and all were healthy and had undetectable or low levels of the abnormal mitochondrial DNA. Three babies had short-term symptoms that resolved and did not appear to relate to mitochondrial disease. All babies are developing normally to date, with the oldest 5 years of age.The studies emphasise that longer-term followup needs to be performed, and the efficiency of the method could be further improved to achieve higher pregnancy rates. They demonstrate the value of offering the program in conjunction with other reproductive options, such as pre-implantation genetic testing, which can be effective in women with lower risk. I regard these results as very encouraging and supporting the ongoing development and use of mitochondrial donation in the UK and Australia.
Dr Santiago Restrepo Castillo, biomedical engineer and postdoctoral researcher at the University of Texas at Austin (USA), said:
“Mitochondrial diseases are a group of chronic metabolic disorders that can be fatal. These diseases are caused by mutations in the human genome, which consists of nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA. In particular, metabolic disorders caused by mutations in mitochondrial DNA, which affect one in five thousand people, are maternally inherited and currently incurable. In recent years, there have been major advancements in the development of strategies for the treatment or prevention of genetic disorders caused by mutations in nuclear DNA. In contrast, similar strategies for diseases caused by alterations in mitochondrial DNA have remained largely understudied. Aiming to establish a preventive strategy for metabolic diseases caused by mitochondrial DNA mutations, the authors of this pair of studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine developed an integrated program of preimplantation genetic testing and pronuclear transfer (PGT and PNT, respectively). In this program, female patients carrying mitochondrial mutations underwent PGT to identify embryos with low levels of mitochondrial DNA mutations. In cases where an embryo with these characteristics was identified, the embryo was implanted in the patient and the course of the pregnancy was monitored. In addition, in cases where it was not possible to identify embryos with low levels of genetic alterations, the patients underwent PNT, a procedure in which mitochondrial DNA without mutations is obtained from a donor. Encouragingly, through this integrated PGT and PNT program, at the time of publication, the authors have already demonstrated a significant reduction in the maternal transmission of mitochondrial mutations in eight cases. Furthermore, the children born from these cases have shown normal development. In conclusion, this study represents a major advancement in the field of medical genetics and genomics. Understanding the current limitations of mitochondrial gene editing, which would allow genetic alterations to be corrected in different contexts, the authors chose to explore a procedure that cuts the problem off at the root by preventing the transmission of the mutated genetic material. Furthermore, this pair of studies demonstrates clinical benefits in children who, without the integrated PGT and PNT program, would likely have been born with debilitating or fatal genetic mutations. It will be exciting to see if the benefits are maintained over time, and it will be critical to further develop this integrated process to increase its success rates”.
Prof Lluís Montoliu, Research Professor at the National Biotechnology Centre (CNB-CSIC) and at the CIBERER-ISCIII, Spain, says:
“In 2016, John Zhang, a specialist doctor at an assisted reproduction clinic in New York called the New Hope Fertility Center, crossed the border into Mexico to perform a procedure that was banned in the US and not yet regulated in Mexico. A couple from Jordan had come to this clinic hoping to have viable offspring. The couple had already had two children who had died from Leigh syndrome, one of several mitochondrial diseases that are often devastating and untreatable. Mitochondria (our energy factories) are usually inherited from the mother, from the egg. The mother had approximately 25% of her mitochondria affected, and these were the ones she had passed on to her two deceased children. Dr. Zhang did not use the procedure pioneered in the UK because of the couple’s Muslim faith, which opposed the destruction of human embryos. Instead, he chose to extract the nucleus from the mother’s egg (actually the metaphase plate, an incomplete nuclear division, which is the stage at which all eggs are ready for fertilization) and transferred it to the egg of another woman (with healthy mitochondria), from which he had also previously removed the nucleus. Once the nucleus from the mother had been transferred to the egg of the second woman, he used this resulting egg to perform in vitro fertilization with sperm from the father to obtain embryos. Dr. Zhang created five embryos in this way, only one of which developed normally, was implanted in the mother’s uterus, and resulted in the birth of a healthy baby. It was the first newborn obtained using the “three-parent technique”: two mothers and one father.
“In the United Kingdom, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) had approved another procedure in 2015, technically different but also called the “three-parent technique,” to solve problems related to mitochondrial diseases. In this case, the father’s sperm is used to fertilize (through intracytoplasmic sperm injection, ICSI) two eggs, one from the mother carrying the affected mitochondria and one from another woman with healthy mitochondria. After fertilization begins, the two pronuclei (paternal and maternal) that appear temporarily are destined to fuse and form the first nucleus of the zygote. Before this happens, researchers can extract the two pronuclei from the in vitro fertilization between the mother’s egg and the father’s sperm and transfer them to the egg of the woman fertilized by the same sperm from the father, from which the pronuclei will have been previously removed. The result is that the egg with the woman’s healthy mitochondria hosts the two pronuclei of the couple, whose baby will be born without the mitochondrial genetic disease and will be genetically from both the father and the mother. The healthy mitochondria will come from the female donor. In this procedure, which is methodologically somewhat more aggressive than the previous one but less risky, one embryo is destroyed to create another, something that the Muslim couple assisted by Dr. Zhang considered unacceptable. The first baby in the United Kingdom obtained through the authorized British three-parent procedure was born in 2023.
“Ten years later [after the approval of this technique in the UK], a team of British and Australian doctors and researchers published the results of applying the British “three-parent” technique to 22 women carrying pathogenic mutations in their mitochondria (and therefore at high risk of having children born with these incurable diseases) in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). Of the 22 women treated, only 8 gave birth (36%), and one more pregnancy is still in progress. The eight babies born are healthy, with no signs or very low levels of affected mitochondria, which are not sufficient to cause the disease. So far, all eight children are doing well. Only a couple of them developed minor clinical problems, initially unrelated to the procedure, which were resolved with treatment or spontaneously. In addition, the researchers applied a second technique (preimplantation genetic testing, or PGT) to women with heteroplasmy (a mixture of healthy and affected mitochondria) to assess the percentage of affected mitochondria in babies obtained through in vitro fertilization and select those with lower values of affected mitochondria. In this case, they obtained 16 pregnancies from 39 women (41%) with the result of 18 babies born with a percentage of affected mitochondria of less than 7%.
“In Spain, our Law 14/2006 of May 26 on assisted human reproduction techniques does not explicitly refer to this technique (which did not exist when this legislation was passed), so sensu stricto the procedure is neither expressly prohibited nor explicitly authorized in our country. Essentially, it is not regulated. The legal and ethical doubts that remain have so far prevented the three-parent technique from being applied in Spain.However, this new study shows that the technique has a remarkable success rate (36%) that could well be offered to couples in which the mother is a carrier of affected mitochondria to have offspring free from terrible mitochondrial diseases. Personally, I believe that we should allow this technique in our country in assisted reproduction clinics that have adequate training in this sophisticated method of embryo intervention.”
Dr Paul Wuh-Liang Hwu, Professor, College of Medicine, Pediatrics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan / Distinguished Research Fellow, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, said:
“In this week’s New England Journal of Medicine, two research articles published by groups of researchers from the UK describe the success of mitochondrial donation treatments for mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diseases. Each human cell contains a few hundred mitochondria. The mitochondrion is a double membrane-bound organelle, and each mitochondrion contains a few copies of double-stranded, circular DNA molecules of around 16,500 genetic units (base pairs).
“Mitochondria are responsible for energy (ATP) production, fatty acid oxidation, and some other functions for the cells. Pathological variations or deletions of mitochondrial DNA can impair mitochondrial function, and when the proportion of defective mitochondria (heteroplasmy level) is high, cause serious symptoms involving the brain, muscle, and metabolism. During reproduction, all mitochondria are inherited from the mother (the egg). However, the level of defected mitochondria in offspring can be very different from their mothers, leaving reproduction planning almost impossible.
“In the two studies, mitochondrial donation by pronuclear transfer (PNT) was conducted to reduce the reproductive risk of women with mitochondrial diseases. Both the mitochondrial donor and patient eggs were fertilized first. The nucleus of the donor’s fertilised egg was removed and discarded, leaving behind a fertilised egg without a nucleus but with healthy mitochondria. The nucleus from the patient’s fertilised egg was then transferred into this enucleated donor egg.
“The PNT zygote was then cultured and implanted to continue pregnancy. All live births were in good health and with low levels of defective mitochondria. PNT has been widely used in animal research and now proved to be safe and efficient in humans. This breakthrough gives a reproductive choice for women affected with mitochondrial diseases, which is very important for the patients and their families. However, this study also broke the ban for continuing pregnancy of genetically manipulated human embryos. One argument is that PNT does not really touch the genetic materials but only provides normal mitochondria. The excellent outcome of this study also eases the concerns of nuclear/mitochondrial genome compatibility and other safety issues. Nevertheless, one may still worry if this technology will be abused to improve human physiological quality, for example, creating a body with more efficient energy production. Then, how about adding a little bit of normal, or good, DNA to the nuclear genome, if we can do that safely?
“As doctors and researchers who take care of patients with genetic disease, we welcome inventions, including reproduction medicine, that can help patients. Certainly, before the safety of new treatments can be confirmed, they should be used in patients with no other choices, or with a favorable benefit over risk. Recently, gene therapies, including gene editing treatments, are rapidly developing, offering hope to patients who previously have no option for treatment. However, we need to ask people to restrain themselves, not to apply PNT or gene therapy to improve the health of people without a medical condition, but to let these new treatments be developed to rescue lives of patients.”
Prof Lee Chung-HisProfessor, Graduate Institute of Health and Biotechnology Law, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan, said:
“Pronuclear Transfer Technology: Advancing with Cautious Innovation and International Consensus. While early clinical results show promise in reducing the level of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA in newborns, the application of Pronuclear transfer (PNT) raises significant ethical and regulatory questions that must be addressed through both national oversight and international dialogue. From a bioethical standpoint, germline modification—defined as altering genetic material in a way that affects future generations—has long been met with caution. This is because it involves irreversible changes to the human genome, with potential consequences not only for the individuals born from such interventions but also for society’s understanding of what it means to be human.
“Pronuclear transfer, however, occupies a unique space in this debate. It targets mitochondrial DNA, which, although essential for cellular energy production, contributes relatively little to traits traditionally associated with identity, such as physical appearance, personality, or intelligence. Because of this limited influence on key phenotypic characteristics, PNT is viewed by some as an acceptable “ethical testing ground” for germline-level intervention. Rather than resorting to high-risk gene therapy after the onset of a hereditary disease, using PNT technology to reduce the likelihood of disease is a more ethically acceptable option. It provides a possible pathway to explore the responsible use of reproductive technologies without crossing the bright-line boundaries typically drawn around nuclear DNA modification.
“Nonetheless, mitochondrial DNA modification is not without ethical complexity. Even if its direct functional role is narrower, it still involves heritable changes and the creation of embryos with genetic contributions from three individuals—the intended mother and father, and a mitochondrial donor. This raises questions about identity, kinship, and the rights of the resulting child, especially regarding disclosure and autonomy. Moreover, the long-term health effects of such interventions remain unknown. To prevent a gradual erosion of ethical boundaries, transparent ethical review processes and long-term clinical monitoring must be established as foundational requirements for any country considering the use of PNT.
“From a clinical perspective, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) should remain the first-line option for reducing the risk of mitochondrial disease transmission. PGT is a more established and less invasive method that allows for the selection of embryos with minimal or undetectable levels of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA. In many cases, this approach has proven effective and carries fewer biological and ethical uncertainties than PNT. In contrast, PNT is a more complex and experimental procedure that combines nuclear DNA from the parents with mitochondrial DNA from a donor egg, and it may result in lower fertilization rates or higher embryonic loss. Therefore, in keeping with the precautionary principle in bioethics, PNT should be considered only when PGT is not feasible or has been shown to be ineffective.
“The United Kingdom currently leads in the clinical implementation of PNT, having established a strict licensing and regulatory regime through the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA). The UK’s model reflects a commitment to enabling scientific advancement while maintaining ethical vigilance. However, reproductive technologies such as PNT are inherently transnational. If only a few countries offer access to such procedures, it may prompt “reproductive tourism”, whereby patients travel abroad to seek unregulated or less strictly governed treatments, potentially undermining safety standards and ethical norms.
“For this reason, a coordinated international approach is urgently needed. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Medical Association (WMA) are well-positioned to initiate global discussions and help formulate shared ethical guidelines and governance frameworks. These discussions should encompass not only scientific and medical dimensions but also social, cultural, and legal implications. Establishing minimum ethical standards and oversight mechanisms will help ensure that the benefits of PNT are pursued responsibly and that global health equity and ethical integrity are preserved.”
‘Mitochondrial Donation and Preimplantation Genetic Testing for mtDNA Disease’ by Louise A. Hyslop et al. and ‘Mitochondrial Donation in a Reproductive Care Pathway for mtDNA Disease’ by Robert McFarland et al. was published in The New England Journal of Medicine at 22:00 UK time on Wednesday 16th July.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2415539
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2503658
Declared interests
Dr David J Clancy: No interests to declare
Prof Joanna Poulton: Nothing to declare
Prof Dusko Ilic: No conflicts of interest
Prof Dagan Wells: I don’t think I have any declarations relevant to this.
Dr Andy Greenfield: Andy was a member of the board of the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority (HFEA) from 2009 to 2018; he was a member of its Scientific & Clinical Advances Advisory Committee (SCAAC) and Chair of its Licence Committee. He chaired the 3rd and 4th preclinical scientific reviews of the safety and efficacy of mitochondrial donation, in 2014 and 2016. Andy chairs the Independent Advisory Committee of the MitoHOPE Program in Australia. He is also a member of the board of the Human Tissue Authority (HTA), the Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC), the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) and Singapore’s Ministry of Health Regulatory Advisory Panel. Andy’s programme of research in developmental genetics was funded by the Medical Research Council at its Harwell Unit from 1996 to 2021. All opinions expressed are his own and not necessarily shared by any organisations with which he is associated.
Mr Stuart Lavery: No DOIs
Prof Bert Smeets: I am scientific advisor for the HFEA on PNT applications.
Sarah Norcross: PET – https://www.progress.org.uk/ – is a charity that improves choices for people affected by infertility and genetic conditions, and that campaigned for the introduction of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015 into UK law.
Beth Thompson: Wellcome funded research into mitochondrial donation and co-funded the clinical trial to assess the safety and effectiveness of the treatment.
Danielle Hamm: The Nuffield Council on Bioethics conducted an ethical review of new techniques that aim to prevent the transmission of maternally-inherited mitochondrial DNA disorders in 2012. The report and key findings of the review are available here.
HFEA: As of 1 July 2025, 35 patients have been given approval for mitochondrial donation treatment by the HFEA Statutory Approvals Committee. These decisions are made on an individual case by case basis where there are no other options for the families involved and in strict accordance with the law. The published papers set out that 25 of those patients have undergone pronuclear transfer (mitochondrial donation treatment.)
Prof. Dr. Marcus Deschauer: “Apart from the fact that I spent six months as a researcher in the Mitochondrial Research Group over 20 years ago and subsequently collaborated with the group on scientific projects, and that I am of course well acquainted with some of the co-authors of the two papers, I have no conflicts of interest.”
Dr. Dunja M. Baston-Büst: “I have no conflict of interest.”
Dr Holger Prokisch: “I have no conflicts of interest.”
Prof. Dr. Nils-Göran Larsson: “I have no conflicts of interest with this work.”
Prof. Dr. Heidi Mertes: “I have no conflicts of interest.”
Prof David Thorburn: David has declared he has no financial conflicts of interest and has the following unpaid positions:
Board Member of the Mito Foundation (the major relevant mito advocacy group) and he played a prominent role in their advocacy for legalising mitochondrial donation in Australia.
He is also a Member of the MitoHOPE Executive, funded by the Medical Research Future Fund to deliver an Australian clinical trial of mitochondrial donation.
Dr Santiago Restrepo Castillo: No conflicts of interest
Prof Lluís Montoliu: He declares that he has no conflicts of interest
For all other experts, no reply to our request for DOIs was received.
JACKSON, MS – Two individuals with ties to the Venezuelan organized crime syndicate Tren de Araqua pleaded guilty to bank theft, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Patrick A. Lemon of the Southern District of Mississippi and FBI Special Agent in Charge Robert A. Eikhoff.
According to court documents and statements made in open court, Jesus Rene Cabrera Tobias, 25 and Darwin Javier Delgado, 46, pleaded guilty after being indicted by a federal grand jury for bank theft. On August 8, 2024, Tobias and Delgado stole $21,500 from an ATM machine in Enterprise, Mississippi by hacking the ATM operating system and disabling the ATM security features by installing a foreign device that allowed them to assume control of the ATM.
Surveillance footage recovered by FBI on the night of the theft captured Tobias unlock the ATM and open the machine to access the internal system that controlled the ATM operating system and security features. The footage showed that after manipulating the ATM, Tobias returned to their vehicle and retrieved a small electronic device to install within the ATM. After a brief period of manipulating the ATM using the small electronic device, the ATM then emptied by continuously producing United States currency from the cash tray. Tobias collected the cash as it was disbursed from the ATM and transferred it to another individual in the vehicle.
Investigators identified the suspect vehicle and its owner through the surveillance footage. The registered owner of the vehicle was Delgado. Surveillance footage from a nearby store captured Tobias and Delgado traveling in the suspect vehicle and shopping within the store.
The suspect vehicle was stopped the next day in Texas by officers with the Texas Department of Public Safety. Delgado and Cabrera were found in the vehicle and arrested. Two cell phones and clothing matching the clothing worn during the bank theft operation were recovered from the suspect vehicle upon execution of a search warrant. A forensic examination of the cellular phones contained photographs and videos from the instant offense, including multiple videos of the defendants manipulating other ATMs and withdrawing cash. The forensic examination also showed that the photographs and videos taken during the theft contained metadata placing the defendants at the scene of the crime. The ATM hard drive was forensically examined by FBI and was shown to have been compromised with malware that disabled the ATM security features.
Tobias and Delgado are citizens of Venezuela. During the investigation, Investigators discovered that Tobias and Delgado committed the theft in coordination with members of the transnational criminal organization Tren de Araqua from Venezuela.
“Today’s announcement sends a clear message: Tren de Aragua transnational criminal operations will not be tolerated and the FBI will aggressively pursue TdA’s scourge of criminal activity. Tobias and Delgado brazenly tampered with ATM machines defrauding banks and the American people,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Robert A. Eikhoff. “These guilty pleas underscore the FBI’s commitment in collaboration with our state and federal partners in identifying, pursuing, disrupting, and dismantling organized crime syndicates, ultimately eradicating TdA’s presence and influence in the U.S.”
Tobias is scheduled to be sentenced on September 10, 2025. Delgado is scheduled to be sentenced on October 7, 2025. Tobias and Delgado face a maximum sentence of ten years imprisonment followed by possible deportation. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
The FBI investigated the case with assistance from the Clarke County Sheriff’s Office, Meridian Police Department, Decatur Police Department, Enterprise Police Department, and the Texas Department of Public Safety.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Samuel Goff and Brett Grantham are prosecuting the case.
