Category: Banking

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: NZ banks should follow Macquarie’s lead, ditch the climate cabal

    Source: ACT Party

    ACT Rural Communities spokesperson Mark Cameron is renewing calls for Kiwi banks to leave the Net Zero Banking Alliance in the wake of the withdrawal of Australia’s Macquarie Group.

    “First it was the big American banks, then Canada’s banks, and now Macquarie Group is the first of the big Australian banks to pull out of the alliance, with pressure mounting on other Aussie banks to do the same.

    “The Net Zero Banking Alliance was set up to change lending practices for the sake of climate goals. But there’s been a political sea change and the appetite for woke banking has disappeared. If the banks think punishing farmers and miners is necessary to satisfy a political agenda, they’re mistaken, and it’s time that message got through.

    “If there was previously a commercial advantage for banks to join the alliance, that advantage is fading fast as one bank after another gets out. The longer New Zealand’s banks and their parent companies remain in the UN’s cabal of banking wokery, the more out of touch they look.

    “As part of the inquiry into banking practices I’m leading alongside Cameron Brewer, we’ve called the four biggest banks back to answer more questions. The inquiry has unearthed deep concerns, especially from rural communities, over the debanking of legitimate sectors and a perceived unequal playing field between town and country.

    “I will be asking what is driving banks to act in this way. It would be concerning if the actions of the government through international agreements or through the way we regulate at home is encouraging banks to move beyond commercial incentives and punish rural communities.

    “ACT continues to question the role of regulation in anti-farmer, anti-miner banking practices. The Financial Markets Authority imposes emissions reporting requirements on banks. We warned in 2021 that these rules would impact loans on farmers, and we still have that concern.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: ACCC welcomes passage of world-first scams prevention laws

    Source: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission

    The ACCC welcomes the passage of the Scams Prevention Framework Bill in Parliament today.

    This world-first legislation enhances protections across the economy by setting out consistent and enforceable obligations for businesses in key sectors where scammers operate.

    “The financial crime type, scams, present an unacceptable threat to the Australian community and have had a devastating impact on hundreds of thousands of Australians,” ACCC Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe said.

    “This Bill is a critical step in the fight against scams – creating overarching principles that all members of designated sectors must comply with.  We know scammers will exploit weak links in the system – so these principles are key to a consistent approach.”

    Under the new legislation, the ACCC will closely monitor regulated entities’ compliance with principles to prevent, detect, disrupt, respond to and report scams.

    The Scams Prevention Framework empowers the ACCC to investigate potential breaches and take enforcement action where entities do not take reasonable steps to fulfill their obligations under these principles.

    Businesses that do not meet their obligations under the Framework can face fines up to $50 million.

    “Individuals have been bearing the brunt of the responsibility to combat scammers for too long,” Ms Lowe said.

    “While the steps taken by some organisations over the last few years are welcomed, the Framework provides the opportunity for joint effort across government and industry to develop solutions to scam challenges and for consumers to access meaningful redress.”

    “Importantly, the Framework enables consumers to seek redress from regulated businesses when those businesses have not met their obligations,” Ms Lowe said.

    Banks, certain digital platforms, including social media, and telecommunications providers will be the first sectors required to comply with the legislation.

    The ACCC is a strong supporter of mandatory industry scams codes and, through the National Anti-Scam Centre, has already begun preparing incrementally for the Framework.

    “In reaching this important milestone, we acknowledge that there is considerable work ahead to implement the Framework, including the formal designation of sectors, development of sector codes, consumer and industry guidance,” Ms Lowe said.

    “We will continue to work closely with government, fellow regulators, industry and community agencies to make sure these elements of the Framework work for all stakeholders, most especially consumers.”

    Background

    The ACCC runs the National Anti-Scam Centre, which commenced on 1 July 2023, and Scamwatch service. The National Anti-Scam Centre is a virtual centre that sits within the ACCC and brings together experts from government, law enforcement and the private sector, to disrupt scams before they reach consumers.

    The National Anti-Scam Centre analyses and acts on trends from shared data and raises consumer awareness about how to spot and avoid scams.

    The ACCC, through the National Anti-Scam Centre, has already been partnering with stakeholders across the scams ecosystem to share intelligence and information to detect and disrupt scams on a voluntary basis. The Framework will significantly boost the contributions from industry and require designated businesses to share scam intelligence with the ACCC. 

    The new Scams Prevention Framework will be critical to cutting off scammers before they can reach Australians.

    Under the Framework, the ACCC will also enforce the digital platforms sector scams code and will take enforcement action where digital platforms breach their obligations under this code.

    The Australian Securities and Investments Commission will be the regulator for the banking sector code and the Australian Communications and Media Authority will be the regulator for the telecommunications sector code. Regulators have in place processes to work together to help ensure the right action by the right regulator at the right time.

    The ACCC supports the establishment of a single external dispute resolution body under the new Framework and looks forward to working with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA).

    The ACCC’s submissions to the Treasury Exposure Draft, which includes further analysis of the reform can be found online.

    How to spot and avoid scams

    STOP – Don’t give money or personal information to anyone if you’re unsure. Scammers will create a sense of urgency. Don’t rush to act. Say no, hang up, delete.

    CHECK – Ask yourself could the call or text be fake? Scammers pretend to be from organisations you know and trust. Contact the organisation using information you source independently, so that you can verify if the call is real or not.

    PROTECT – Act quickly if something feels wrong. Contact your bank immediately if you lose money. If you have provided personal information call IDCARE on 1800 595 160. The more we talk the less power they have. Report scams to the National Anti-Scam Centre’s Scamwatch service at scamwatch.gov.au when you see them.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: NAB welcomes new scam prevention legislation

    Source: National Australia Bank

    NAB today welcomed the passing of the Government’s Scam Prevention Framework (SPF) legislation as a positive step to better protect Australian consumers and businesses.

    NAB Chief Financial Crime Risk Officer Paul Jevtovic said: “What makes Australia’s Scam Prevention Framework world-leading is a laser focus on prevention and stopping the crime from occurring in the first place. We need to shut Australia’s door on the criminals.

    “Scams are a global epidemic and this legislation will help the fight to better protect Australians and make our country a much harder place for these criminals to target.

    “Banks can’t stop dodgy text messages, impersonation phone calls or bogus investment schemes on social media, the same way telcos or social media platforms can’t put added measures around payments.

    “Working together and lifting measures across these sectors we can have a much greater impact on driving scammers out of Australia.

    “We look forward to continued consultation with Government and regulators on the establishment of SPF rules and the industry codes.”

    Customers, banking & finance

    SEE ALL TOPICS

    Media Enquiries

    For all media enquiries, please contact the NAB Media Line on 03 7035 5015

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Sens. Moran, Scott Join Colleagues in Introducing Legislation to Ease Burdens on Small Businesses

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kansas – Jerry Moran

    WASHINGTON. – U.S. Senators Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) joined nine of their Senate colleagues in introducing legislation to ease burdens and shield small businesses from excessive legal red tape. The Protect Small Businesses from Excessive Paperwork Act of 2025 would extend the filing deadline for businesses to report beneficial ownership information (BOI) until January 1, 2026, giving the U.S. Department of Treasury more time to educate business owners on the new reporting requirements, assess Biden administration BOI decisions and make certain small businesses are not overburdened or penalized for violating unclear and unnecessarily complicated regulations.

    The senators were joined by Sens. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Katie Boyd Britt (R-Ala.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Jim Banks (R-Ind.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) and James Lankford (R-Okla.).

    “Small businesses are the backbone of our rural communities, and with limited staff and resources, the current reporting requirements place an unnecessary burden on our businesses,” said Sen. Moran. “Extending the filing deadline allows small businesses the additional time they need to comply with updated guidelines and avoid harmful penalties.”

    “Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, and we need to ensure they have the necessary time and information to comply with reporting requirements from the federal government,” said Sen. Scott. “This commonsense bill will ensure small businesses are protected and not overly burdened by unclear and unnecessarily complicated regulations – allowing them to focus on serving their customers while following the law.”

    Representative Zach Nunn (R-Iowa) led companion legislation in the House, which passed on Monday by a vote of 408-0.

    BACKGROUND:

    • The Corporate Transparency Act was signed into law as part of the FY21 National Defense Authorization Act and established new reporting requirements around beneficial ownership for businesses.
    • During implementation of the rule, the U.S. Department of Treasury Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) failed to notify small businesses of the new reporting requirements. According to a survey by the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB), 80% of NFIB members have never heard of the new reporting requirements.
    • On January 23, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to block the enforcement of these filing requirements. Now, small businesses across the country are expected to comply immediately or face harsh penalties.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Five best articles in Russian for 12.02.2025

    MIL Analysis : Here are the top five Russian language articles published today. The analysis consists of five articles that are prioritized at the moment.

    Today’s analysis shows economic productivity and the hot topic of cybersecurity of citizens from fraudsters.

    Rosneft is expanding contactless fuel payment and has already introduced this system at gas stations in Khakassia. The Moscow subway held the first training sessions with guide dogs this year, 12 future service dogs started their training. Also, free cyber sports tournaments will be held in Moscow, in which everyone can take part.

    You can read one of the articles below.

    1. Financial news: February 14 at 15:00 will be held a press conference on the results of the meeting of the Board of Directors on monetary policy.

    The event will be attended by the Chairman of the Bank of Russia Elvira Nabiullina and Deputy Chairman of the Bank of Russia Alexei Zabotkin.

    Elvira Nabiullina will make a statement on monetary policy and medium-term forecast.

    2. Financial news: Interview with German Zubarev “Komsomolskaya Pravda”.

    “Safe accounts” to save money does not exist

    One hundred million rubles. That’s how much financial fraudsters swindle from Russians every day. And this is only official data. Last year, the law that will allow to limit the losses started to work. Cellular operators block suspicious numbers, banks suspend payments and freeze accounts. But criminals still find the keys to our piggy banks.

    3. “Rosneft” introduced contactless fuel payment services at its filling stations in Khakassia.

    “Rosneft continued joint work with the Yandex Fueling Service to expand the geography of contactless fuel payment. The service became available at all Rosneft filling stations in the Republic of Khakassia. It is already possible to refuel a car using the mobile application at 95% of the network’s stations in almost all regions where the Company operates.

    4. Moscow Metro held the first classes with guide dogs this year.

    Moscow Metro

    The Moscow Metro held the first training sessions with guide dogs this year, with 12 future service dogs starting their training.

    Since 2014, more than 400 guide dogs have been trained in the subway under the guidance of inspectors from the Passenger Mobility Center and specialists from the Guide Dog Training School of the All-Russian Society for the Blind.

    5. “Moscow cybersport”: free online tournaments begin in the capital.

    Free online cybersport tournaments are starting in Moscow. During 2025 at least 135 online competitions will be held on the cybermos.ru platform. The first meetings are scheduled for February 14-16.

    Learn more about MIL’s content and data services by visiting milnz.co.nz.

    Regards MIL!

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI: Ponce De Leon Foundation Grant Awarded in the Amount of $610,000 to Nonprofits

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    BRONX, N.Y., Feb. 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Board of Directors of the Ponce De Leon Foundation is pleased to announce it has awarded $610,000 to nonprofits that are making a difference in our communities. Since its inception in 2017, the Foundation has provided over $2.4 million in grants.

    Madeline V. Marquez, Executive Director of the Ponce De Leon Foundation, stated, “Year after year our grant applications increase, and it is evident the immense needs in our communities. We pride ourselves in ensuring all our focus areas are recognized and that we spread our funds equitably as we continue to support and strengthen the impact to our organizations.”

    Carlos P. Naudon, President and Director of the Ponce De Leon Foundation, stated, “The mission on corporate social responsibility remains, we live it, breathe it and stay true to it. Once again overjoyed in serving our communities.”

    Steven A. Tsavaris, Chairman of the Ponce De Leon Foundation added, “Partnership is key, especially when missions align. Humbled by these impactful groups and organizations.”

    ACE Programs: $25,000 for the Expansion of Services for Low-Income, Independently Housed Individuals in Western Queens Project

    Act Now Foundation, Inc.: $20,000 for the Alzheimer’s Care Project

    Andromeda Community Initiative: $30,000 for Constructive Career

    Brooklyn Youth Sports Club Inc: $30,000 for Brooklyn Youths Sports Club Program.

    Creative Art Works: $15,000 for Public Art Youth Employment Programs.

    Daniel’s Music Foundation: $20,000 for Disability Awareness.

    Education Through Music: $30,000 for Music Education Program.

    Girls Incorporated of New York City: $30,000 for the Project Accelerate.

    Hope Kids NY.: $25,000 for the Ready, Set, Go to College Program.

    Housing Partnership Development Corp: $30,000 for Homeownership Counseling & Education program.

    I Challenge Myself Inc: $10,000 for Cycling Smartly in The Bronx program.

    Jamaica Center for Arts & Learning Inc: $20,000 for JCAL Riddim Section.

    Neighborhood Self Help by Older Persons Project Inc (SHOPP): $30,000 for Senior Community Assistance.

    New Heights Youth Inc: $25,000 for College Bound Program.

    New York Women’s Chamber of Commerce: $30,000 for the ContractHer Program.

    Palisades Emergency Residence PERC: $15,000 for Technology Access Program.

    Part of the Solution (POTS): $30,000 for the ESOL Support Program.

    Princeton Center for Leadership & Learning: $30,000 for Connecting Gardening, Science & Literacy

    Project Hope Charities, Inc: $30,000 for Food Pantry Project.

    Regional Aid for Interim Needs Inc RAIN: $30,000 for Cucina Dolores Mobile Food Kitchen Project.

    Spanish Speaking Elderly Council RAICES: $30,000 for Mindful Journey Program.

    The HOPE Program Inc: $30,000 for Digital Literacy for Low-Income New Yorkers Program.

    Union City Music Project, Inc: $15,000 for the 2025 After School Orchestral Music Education Program.

    The Young People’s Chorus of New York City: $30,000 for YPC South Bronx Community Chorus Program.

    About the Ponce De Leon Foundation: The Ponce De Leon Foundation is a private 501(c)3 charitable corporation launched in 2017 with a generous gift of stock and cash from Ponce Bank. As the bank has grown, so has the foundation, and when Ponce Bank became a fully public entity in January of 2022 additional funds were donated. Ponce De Leon Foundation’s mission remains, to improve the quality of life in the communities in which Ponce Bank maintains full-service branches. With these gifts, Ponce Bank made clear its commitment to continue its tradition of supporting the communities it serves. For further information on the Ponce De Leon Foundation, you can send an email to Grants@Poncedeleonfoundation.org.

    About Ponce Bank: Ponce Bank is a subsidiary of Ponce Financial Group, Inc., a NASDAQ company trading under the symbol PDLB. Ponce Bank is a federally chartered stock savings association headquartered in the Bronx, New York. The Bank’s business is conducted through the administrative office, 13 branch banking offices and 5 mortgage loan centers. The banking offices are located in the Bronx (4 branches), Manhattan (2 branches), Queens (3 branches), Brooklyn (3 branches), and Union City, New Jersey (1 branch). Mortgage centers are located in Queens, (Flushing, Jamaica and Astoria) Brooklyn (Marine Park), and Bergenfield, New Jersey. The primary market area currently consists of the New York City metropolitan area. www.poncebank.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Australia – Household spending flat in January as Aussies take a break after stronger fourth quarter – CBA

    Source: Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA)

    Spending stalled at 153.4 in January, following a strong sales spending to finish 2024.

    The monthly CommBank Household Spending Insights (HSI) Index was flat in January, unchanged at 153.4, as consumers took a breather from opening their wallets following sale activity in the final months of 2024.  

    Modest spending increases were seen across six of the 12 spending categories, with the most notable uplifts seen in spending on Motor vehicles (+1.5 per cent), Insurance (+1.2 per cent), and Health (+1.0 per cent).  

    The biggest spending falls in January were in Education (-1.8 per cent), driven by reduced spending on universities, Hospitality (-1.0 per cent) and Household Goods (-0.9 per cent).

    “The flat January HSI result was somewhat expected following the spike in spending we saw in the last three months of 2024 off the back of Black Friday, Cyber Monday and Boxing Day sales. Essentials made up the three highest spending categories in the month as consumers pulled back on discretionary spending,” CBA Senior Economist Belinda Allen said.

    “We expect the RBA to lower interest rates at their first meeting of the year next week which will help provide a boost to consumer spending over the coming months. We anticipate a total of 100 basis points of monetary policy easing throughout 2025 to drive an improvement in the consumer spending pulse.”

    On an annual basis, homeowners with a mortgage (+3.0 per cent) have surprisingly seen a larger increase in spending compared to those who own their home outright (+2.8 per cent), while renters continue to lag (+2.0 per cent).

    “The increase in spending by those with a mortgage can be attributed to the fact that not only are this cohort likely at a stage of life where they’re spending on essential items, they’re still dedicating a significant share of their wallet to recreation and entertainment,” Belinda Allen concluded.

    The CommBank HSI index tracks month-on-month data at a macro level and is based on de-identified payments data from approximately 7 million CBA customers, comprising roughly 30 per cent of all Australian consumer transactions.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Economy – NZ Treasury: Interim Financial Statements of the Government of New Zealand for the six months ended 31 December 2024

    Source: The Treasury

    The Interim Financial Statements of the Government of New Zealand for the six months ended 31 December 2024 were released by the Treasury today.

    The December results are reported against forecasts based on the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update 2024 (HYEFU 2024), published on 17 December 2024, and the results for the same period for the previous year.

     


      

      Year to date Full Year
    December
    2024
    Actual1
    $m
    December

    2024
    HYEFU 2024
    Forecast1
    $m
    Variance2
    HYEFU 2024
    $m
    Variance
    HYEFU 2024
    %
    June
    2025
    HYEFU 2024
    Forecast3
    $m
    Core Crown tax revenue 59,944 59,715 229 0.4 120,623
    Core Crown revenue 66,575 66,284 291 0.4 134,038
    Core Crown expenses 68,879 69,322 443 0.6 144,638
    Core Crown residual cash (11,206) (10,722) (484) (4.5) (16,610)
    Net core Crown debt4 185,834 186,575 741 0.4 192,810
              as a percentage of GDP 44.1% 44.2%     45.1%
    Gross debt 199,099 193,413 (5,685) (2.9) 206,558
              as a percentage of GDP 47.2% 45.9%     48.3%
    OBEGAL excluding ACC (OBEGALx) (3,501) (3,885) 384 9.9 (12,868)
    OBEGAL (4,571) (4,878) 307 6.3 (17,317)
    Operating balance (excluding minority interests) (348) (1,464) 1,116 76.2 (10,161)
    Net worth 187,459 186,373 1,086 0.6 177,492
              as a percentage of GDP 44.5% 44.2%     41.5%
    1. Using the most recently published GDP (for the year ended 30 September 2024) of $421,702 million (Source: Stats NZ).
    2. Favourable variances against forecast have a positive sign and unfavourable variances against forecast have a negative sign.
    3. Using HYEFU 2024 forecast GDP for the year ending 30 June 2025 of $427,252 million (Source: The Treasury).
    4. Net core Crown debt excludes the NZS Fund and core Crown advances. Net core Crown debt may fluctuate during the year largely reflecting the timing of tax receipts.

    Core Crown tax revenue at $59.9 billion was $0.2 billion (0.4%) higher than forecast, with the largest variance in GST being $0.3 billion (1.5%) above forecast.

    Core Crown expenses at $68.9 billion were $0.4 billion (0.6%) below forecast. The variance is mostly timing in nature and was spread across a range of functional spending areas.

    The operating balance before gains and losses excluding ACC (OBEGALx) was a deficit of $3.5 billion, $0.4 billion less than the forecast deficit. When including the revenue and expenses of ACC, the OBEGAL deficit was $4.6 billion, $0.3 billion less than the deficit forecast.

    The operating balance deficit of $0.3 billion was $1.1 billion less than the deficit forecast. This is largely owing to the variances to forecast in net gains and losses for the six months to December 2024, with net losses on non-financial instruments being $1.4 billion lower than forecast, partly offset by net gains on financial instruments being $0.8 billion lower than forecast.

    The core Crown residual cash deficit of $11.2 billion was $0.5 billion more than the deficit forecast and was largely timing in nature with personnel and operating payments occurring earlier than anticipated.

    Net core Crown debt at $185.8 billion (44.1% of GDP), was broadly in line with forecast ($186.6 billion or 44.2% of GDP). While the core Crown residual cash deficit was higher than forecast, its impact on net core Crown debt was more than offset by higher than forecast net gains on financial instruments and the Reserve Bank’s issuance of circulating currency.

    Gross debt at $199.1 billion (47.2% of GDP) was $5.7 billion higher than forecast largely owing to higher than forecast derivatives in loss and issuances of Euro Commercial Paper. However, this increase in gross debt was broadly offset by a corresponding increase in financial assets therefore this has not flowed through to the net core Crown debt measure or to net worth.

    Net worth at $187.5 billion (44.5% of GDP), was $1.1 billion higher than forecast largely reflecting the operating balance results. Net worth consisted of total Crown assets of $597.9 billion ($13.0 billion higher than forecast) and total Crown liabilities of $410.5 billion ($11.9 billion higher than forecast).

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Pair admit stealing ski boat from St. Mary Lake property on Blackfeet Indian Reservation

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    GREAT FALLS — A man and a woman today admitted they stole a ski boat and trailer from property on St. Mary Lake on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, U.S. Attorney Jesse Laslovich said.

    The defendants, Tiffany Rae Morris, 37, of Shelby, and Levi Jacques Carl Johnson, 44, of Kevin, each pleaded guilty in separate hearings to theft within Indian Country. Morris and Johnson face a maximum of five years in prison, a $250,000 fine and three years of supervised release.

    Chief U.S. District Judge Brian M. Morris presided. The court will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. Sentencing was set for June 25. The defendants were released pending further proceedings.

    In court documents, the government alleged that on June 9, 2024, Morris and Johnson stole a ski boat and trailer from the property of the victim, identified as John Doe. The property is on St. Mary Lake on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. Doe reported the theft to law enforcement and posted about it on Facebook. An investigation identified Morris and Johnson as potential suspects, based on video surveillance. The following day, a landowner in the Cut Bank area notified law enforcement that a boat had been abandoned on his property and that he thought it was the stolen boat. John Doe responded to the scene and identified his boat. The boat’s identifying decals had been removed. In interviews with law enforcement, Morris and Johnson admitted to stealing the boat. After the theft was circulated on Facebook, the defendants wanted to return the boat but were afraid of being apprehended and abandoned it in the field. Johnson reported that the decals came off when he power-washed the boat. The boat was a 2007 Ski-doo Challenger 180, valued at more than $1,000.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office is prosecuting the case. Blackfeet Law Enforcement Services, Glacier County Sheriff’s Office, and the FBI conducted the investigation.

    XXX

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI USA: Waller, Reflections on a Maturing Stablecoin Market

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you for inviting me to speak today about stablecoins, an important innovation for the crypto ecosystem with the potential to improve retail and cross-border payments.1 A little over three years ago, I outlined my views on the benefits and risks of stablecoins.2 I can think of no better place than this conference to discuss the maturing stablecoin market and examine potential challenges that could impede stablecoins from reaching their full potential.
    For the purposes of this speech, I define stablecoins as a type of digital asset designed to maintain a stable value relative to a national currency and backed at least one-to-one with safe and liquid assets. Specifically, a pool of assets is held in reserve so that stablecoins can be redeemed for traditional currency in a timely fashion.
    Stablecoins—as with any means of payment—must demonstrate 1) a clear use case and 2) a clear commercial case to be economically viable. These terms are often conflated, but they are different, and both are necessary. Having a use case is how you attract consumers and businesses, while a business model is necessary for issuers of stablecoins to continue operating. As private sector innovators look to expand on the use cases of stablecoins and seek to achieve scale, what might emerge as challenges or roadblocks? This is a question I will explore today, including from a public sector perspective. Of course, as a policymaker, I am not here to endorse any of these use cases or business models, and what follows is not advice or recommendations. Rather, I am discussing them to underscore the varied ecosystem that policymakers must understand.
    I will begin by explaining some of the use cases of stablecoins, including those that are well established and those that are still emerging. The primary use of stablecoins is as a safe crypto store of value. In the early days of crypto trading, buying and selling crypto meant trading one crypto-asset for another crypto-asset. As we have seen, crypto prices can fluctuate substantially, which means crypto-assets that are not anchored as stablecoins suffer from price risk. All financial markets crave the existence of a safe, low-risk asset which allows traders to move out of risky positions into safe ones where the safe asset price is known and stable. The beauty of financial innovation is that if a market demands such an asset, someone will figure out how to supply it. Thus, stablecoins were born.
    A stablecoin’s value is tied to a national fiat currency, with the U.S. dollar being the fiat currency of choice for most stablecoins. In this sense, stablecoins are synthetic dollars. In our everyday life, the dollar serves as a medium of exchange and a unit of account. By their tie to the dollar, stablecoins are the medium of exchange and unit of account in the crypto ecosystem.
    But how does one trade a “real” dollar for a “synthetic” dollar, like a stablecoin? Exchanges already allowed agents to move in and out of the crypto ecosystem but doing so took time and money. Stablecoins provided a marketplace solution to this problem—a means to represent dollars on exchanges so that transactions could be carried out more quickly and efficiently. Currently, stablecoins are involved in over 80 percent of trading volume on major centralized crypto exchanges.3
    A second stablecoin use case is providing a means to access and hold U.S. dollars. Today, around 99 percent of stablecoin market capitalization is denominated in U.S. dollars, and the vast majority of digital asset trades are priced in U.S. dollars.4 This is no surprise given the primacy of the U.S. dollar in global finance and trade, and I believe that stablecoins have the potential to maintain and extend the role of the dollar internationally.5 U.S. dollar stablecoins could be particularly appealing to those in high inflation countries or to those without easy or affordable access to dollar cash or banking services.
    A third use case is cross-border payments. For example, we are hearing increased industry focus on the “stablecoin sandwich” model of cross-border payments, in which fiat currency in one country is converted first into a U.S. dollar stablecoin, then that stablecoin is transferred to another individual, and then finally the stablecoin is converted back into the local fiat currency at its destination. This has the potential to reduce the complexity of a series of correspondent banking networks, improving transparency, cost, and timeliness. As this use case develops, it is critical that market participants implement all anti-money laundering and relevant consumer safeguards.
    The last use case I will describe is in retail payments. At present, stablecoin use for retail payments is very limited. However, I am seeing a lot of new, private sector entrants looking to find ways to support the use of stablecoins for retail payments. For example, firms that provide point-of-sale technology are acquiring innovative fintechs or developing their own capabilities to accept stablecoins for retail purchases. This provides consumers with yet another option. Firms are also looking to incorporate stablecoins—and crypto more broadly—into peer-to-peer payment apps.
    It remains to be seen whether stablecoins will scale for retail payment use cases. Such an evolution would require both a substantial number of consumers to shift their preferences toward using stablecoins and a significant number of businesses to make necessary investments to receive payments via stablecoins. We know that consumer retail payments behavior is sticky, and when behavior does change, it generally happens over a long period. If retail payments use cases do increase, it would probably take years to have a significant impact. That said, if stablecoins reduce transaction fees or allow merchants to attract customers, then merchants could have an incentive to accept them. Ultimately, the market will sort out whether consumers and businesses have the incentives to use stablecoins in this way.
    In addition to stablecoins having clear cut use cases, issuers must have a viable business model. To cite one famous example, Red Lobster’s endless shrimp deal was popular with customers, but it did not turn out to be a sustainable model for the restaurant chain. Let me describe what I think are the incentives for stablecoin issuers, but I am here today to learn more.
    To date, most stablecoin issuers appear to generate revenue primarily by earning higher returns on their reserve assets than they incur in expenses. They issue a zero-interest liability and use the proceeds to acquire interest earning assets, thereby profiting from the spread. As with bank deposits, the interest rate environment will have a significant effect on the profitability of firms issuing stablecoins. Higher interest rates generally mean higher rates of return on reserve assets, which generates revenue for the issuer. However, higher interest rates also have the potential to make non-interest bearing assets less attractive for consumers to hold. That said, users who hold stablecoins as an accessible, safe store of U.S. dollar denominated value may not be particularly sensitive to the interest rate environment, a phenomenon we already see today with some holders of physical U.S. dollars.
    An additional way stablecoin issuers can generate revenue is through fees. This could include charging minting and burning fees, which occur when a customer acquires a new stablecoin for a real dollar or wants to redeem it for real dollars. This is very much like the foreign exchange market in fiat currencies that most of us are familiar with. Alternatively, as occurs with most payments firms, the issuer could earn money from transaction fees.
    Finally, stablecoin issuers may use stablecoins as part of a broader strategy to attract customers to whom they may sell other products and services. In that case, stablecoins could be seen as a “loss leader” to entice customers to use other products or services offered by the stablecoin issuer that are much more profitable.
    With the exception of the last example, the viability of the other business models will depend on the ability of stablecoins to scale as a means of payment and on how consumers and businesses respond. For example, if the stablecoin issuer decides to pass through interest earnings on its assets, that will make the stablecoin more attractive, but it will reduce the profits from issuing a stablecoin. The smaller the interest rate spread, the more important scale becomes. For the fee-based models, free entry into this space will drive down fees as it does in any other market, which will reduce the revenue from issuing a stablecoin.
    Within this market, scale is important for achieving certain use cases as well as satisfying certain business models. For example, stablecoins are unlikely to become a viable option for retail payments if consumers question whether stablecoins will be widely accepted as a means of payment, while stablecoin issuers cannot generate significant revenue from interest on backing assets or fees without scale. I call this the “Field of Dreams” problem—if you build it, will they come?
    With all of that in mind, let’s now dive into some of the potential challenges or roadblocks that will need to be overcome for stablecoins to achieve their full potential.
    The first theme I will explore is one that I have discussed in the past—the safety and soundness of stablecoins and the need for a clear regulatory regime for stablecoins in the United States.6 Stablecoins are forms of private money and, like any form of private money, are subject to run risk, and we have seen “depegs” of some stablecoins in recent years. Additionally, all payment systems face risk of failure, and stablecoins are subject to clearing, settlement, and other payment system risks as well. At the same time, it is important to note that the risks faced by stablecoin issuers are not the same risks faced by banks. The stablecoin market would benefit from a U.S. regulatory and supervisory framework that addresses stablecoin risks directly, fully, and narrowly. This framework should allow both non-banks and banks to issue regulated stablecoins and should consider the effects of regulation on the payments landscape, including competing payment instruments.
    I want to reiterate that I think it is important that U.S. legislation makes provision for the supervision and regulation of stablecoin issuers that is proportionate to the risks they pose, without stifling their innovative potential while the marketplace is still developing. I believe in the power of the private sector to develop solutions that benefit businesses and consumers, with the job of the public sector to create a fair set of rules for market participants to operate within, including guardrails that ensure safety for consumers and the financial system as a whole. Having a level of certainty is important for businesses looking to invest in new products and services as well as for consumer confidence and assurance.
    Fragmentation is the next theme I’ll explore, first from a technical perspective. Currently, several popular blockchain networks are designed as distinct from one another. Firms looking to scale across blockchains are seeking technical solutions to achieve cross-chain interoperability. Will this ultimately prove efficient, especially in a world with multiple stablecoin providers operating within potentially different combinations of blockchain networks? Or will there be multiple, competing ecosystems, for example where one stablecoin dominates on certain blockchains, and another stablecoin dominates on others? Alternatively, a stablecoin market featuring a high degree of interoperability could support a variety of stablecoin issuers and blockchain networks, providing consumers a choice in stablecoins and technologies. It is not yet clear how these dynamics will ultimately impact business models and use cases for stablecoins, but it is an issue that bears watching as firms work to scale and mature their businesses.
    Fragmentation around the use and acceptance of stablecoins will also act as an impediment to scaling and will impact how stablecoin use cases develop. As I noted, stablecoins will prove useful as a means of payment insofar as holders of a specific stablecoin expect that others will accept them. The more people will accept a stablecoin, the more convenient a stablecoin will be. For the retail payment use case, how easy will it be for me as a consumer to pay with stablecoins at the point of sale, either in-person or online? From the merchant perspective, what incentives will firms have to accept stablecoins? Similarly, for cross-border payments, how widely will different firms (and their banking partners) transact in stablecoins? And, more broadly, could stablecoins have the potential to recreate and potentially exacerbate the current challenges associated with correspondent banking, further fragmenting the marketplace? Or could stablecoins mature in such a way to change the market structure of cross-border payments?
    Fragmentation in regulation also has the potential to hold stablecoins back from reaching their full potential. As I already discussed, the stablecoin market does not have a clear regulatory framework in the United States. While there have been efforts to develop some international standards, the emergence of different global stablecoin regulatory regimes creates the potential for conflicting regulation domestically and internationally.7 This regulatory fragmentation could make it difficult for U.S. dollar stablecoin issuers to operate at a global scale. And as I have noted, scale is vital for any means of payment to achieve its full potential.
    For example, under Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, stablecoin issuers can earn interest on their reserve assets as a business model, whereas other regulatory models being discussed would require reserves for stablecoins deemed systemically important to be held as non-interest-bearing central bank deposits, limiting stablecoin issuers into a specific business model. Domestically, state regulators have been key players in the development of the stablecoin market, and several states are in the process of developing state laws or finalizing new regulations related to stablecoin issuance. There is a risk that state regulations may conflict, which could prevent the use of the same stablecoin across all states and reduce stablecoin scalability. As with the United States’ dual banking system, a complementary framework with state and federal regulators working together can allow innovation to flourish while achieving some of the benefits of scale that come with a harmonized set of market rules.
    Different regulatory regimes are also creating separate reserve asset and redemption requirements for stablecoin issuers—a further potential regulatory regime fragmentation. In Europe, non-systemic stablecoin issuers are required to hold a minimum of 30 percent of their backing assets in bank deposits, and regulators have further proposed concentration limits per bank.8 This differs from the requirements of some U.S. state-regulated issuers.9 To operate at a global scale, stablecoin issuers would therefore have to issue the same stablecoin under multiple regimes with separate reserve asset and redemption requirements. Will this be efficient and ultimately prove workable if the number of regulatory regimes domestically and internationally continue to grow? Will we expect a stablecoin issuer to rebalance its reserves when a stablecoin is transferred between users in different countries or U.S. states? Creating consistency at the federal level could allow federal authorities to negotiate with foreign counterparts to ensure global regulations serve the interests of U.S. consumers and businesses and allow the U.S. to be a regulation setter for an asset class primarily denominated in our national unit of account.
    In conclusion, my hope is that the stablecoin market will grow or diminish on the merits of their benefits to consumers and the broader economy. For the private sector, that means continuing to develop innovative solutions that fit a market need while building sustainable business models. And for the public sector, it means setting clear and targeted legal and regulatory frameworks and coordinating those frameworks across states and national boundaries to enable private sector innovation at a global scale.
    Thank you.

    1. Thank you to Marc Rodriguez, Alex Sproveri, Sonja Danburg, and David Mills of the Federal Reserve Board for their assistance in preparing this text. The views expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board. Return to text
    2. See Christopher J. Waller, “Reflections on Stablecoins and Payments Innovations” (speech at “Planning for Surprises, Learning from Crises” 2021 Financial Stability Conference, Cleveland, OH, November 17, 2021). Return to text
    3. See “Share of Trade Volume by Pair Denomination,” The Block, last modified February 10, 2025, https://www.theblock.co/data/crypto-markets/spot/share-of-trade-volume-by-pair-denomination. Return to text
    4. See “DefiLlama-Defi Dashboard,” https://defillama.com/. Return to text
    5. See Christopher J. Waller, “The Dollar’s International Role” (speech at “Climate, Currency, and Central Banking,” Nassau, BS, February 15, 2024). Return to text
    6. See Chrisopher J. Waller, “Reflections on Stablecoins and Payments Innovations.” Return to text
    7. See Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures and Board of the International Organization of Securities Commissions, Application of the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures to stablecoin arrangements (PDF) (Basel: Bank for International Settlements, July 2022). Return to text
    8. See Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023 on markets in crypto-assets, and amending Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010 and Directives 2013/36/EU and (EU) 2019/1937. See European Banking Authority, Draft Regulatory Technical Standards to specify the highly liquid financial instruments with minimal market risk, credit risk and concentration risk under Article 38(5) of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (PDF) (Paris: European Banking Authority, June 2024) and European Banking Authority, Draft Regulatory Technical Standards to further specify the liquidity requirements of the reserve of assets under Article 36(4) of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (PDF) (Paris: European Banking Authority, June 2024). Return to text
    9. For example, see “Virtual Currency Guidance,” New York State Department of Financial Services, last modified June 8. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Policies to Bolster Social Resilience in Context of More Frequent, Complex Crises among Topics Discussed, as Commission for Social Development Continues Session

    Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

    During one of two round-table discussions held today by the Commission for Social Development, panelists emphasized the importance of governance, preparedness and investment in human capital to strengthen “social resilience” — the ability of individuals and societies to prevent, absorb, adapt and recover positively from crises.

    The Commission — established in 1946 by the Economic and Social Council as one of its functional commissions — advises the United Nations on social development issues, and its sixty-third session will run through 14 February.

    The first panel discussion, titled “Policies to bolster social resilience in the context of more frequent and complex crises”, featured presentations that together offered a comprehensive understanding of the multidimensional nature of resilience and the policy actions needed to reinforce it.

    “The sixty-third session of the Commission for Social Development comes at a pivotal time as we reflect on the legacies of the World Summit for Social Development held three decades ago in Copenhagen,” said Moderator Angela Kawandami, Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services of Zambia.  While the principles of social inclusion, poverty eradication and equity remain as vital as possible, the global landscape has transformed significantly, presenting new and compounding challenges that demand urgent and innovative solutions today, she said, adding that crises — more frequent, interconnected and complex, spanning geopolitical, economic, health and environmental spheres — are testing the resilience of societies and institutions.

    Meir Bing, Chief Executive Officer at the Open University of Israel, presented a case study of building resilience in minority populations in his country, where the number of minority students in higher education more than doubled in the last decade.  He said that a year ago, he was General Director of the Ministry of Social Equality in charge of minorities.  Of the 10 million people in his country, 2 million are religious and ethnical minority groups, including Muslim, Christian and Druze, he said, adding that many of them are young and face socioeconomic challenges.

    He highlighted the three keys to building resilience in vulnerable populations:  fostering trust between Government and social and business sectors; enhancing infrastructure and public services; and creating communities.  Sharing how educational and other infrastructure and socioeconomic projects are expanded in the country’s local communities, he said that the percentage of students from minority groups in bachelor’s degree programmes increased from 10 per cent in 2010 to nearly 20 per cent in 2023.

    Marek Kamiński, explorer and founder of the Kaminski Foundation, said that during his expeditions, he learned that physical strength isn’t enough, stating:  “The real fight happens in the mind, with fear and doubt.  We all need to ask, are we strong enough inside to face the challenges ahead?”  Today’s world needs practical solutions to help people handle crises.  That’s why he created LifePlan Academy, a programme that teaches mental resilience, stress management and how to adapt to challenges.  It’s a practical tool that works in any country with any culture, he said, stressing: “With the right tools and support, anyone can overcome challenges and achieve their goals.”

    Michael Woolcock, Lead Social Scientist in the Development Research Group at the World Bank, said that development policies are as effective as the shared legitimacy they enjoy.  Development policies will struggle, where societal groups despise one another, where elite factions use lies and violence to secure power, where there is little coherence or trust between local and national authority, and where Governments reject international law and covenants to which they are a signatory.  “So all these nice policies that we come up with — unless they can engage with these local contexts and imbue them with the legitimacy they need to do their difficult work — are probably going to struggle,” he said.

    Obiageli Ezekwesili, President of Human Capital Africa, founder of the School of Politics Policy and Governance, and Senior Economic Adviser at the Africa Economic Development Policy Initiative, said that “democracy is in crisis more than it had ever been”.  The power of society to be resilient depends on how everyone feels cared for within society. Today’s democratic processes are exclusionary in many ways.  That’s because the tiny fraction of people who exercise political leadership in many countries have become monopoly democrats.  “We must fix politics,” she said, noting a strong correlation between the quality of politics and economic performance.  “Let’s keep an eye on the United States of America,” she added.

    Michael Woolcock, Lead Social Scientist, World Bank, served as moderator for the second panel, which focused on “Universal rights-based social protection systems that adapt to evolving risks and support social resilience”.  “For our present purposes, we are going to recognize that social resilience refers to the capacity of individuals and societies to prevent, resist, absorb, adapt, respond and recover positively, efficiently and effectively when faced with a wide range of long-term prospects for sustainable development, peace and security, human rights and well-being for all,” he said before commencing the panel discussion.

    Danilo Türk, President of Club de Madrid and former President of Slovenia, stressed the need to make sure that social development is guided in a way that promotes the full realization of human rights.  “This means adopting an approach which anticipates and addresses the vulnerabilities of people,” he went on to stress.  That must include the consequences of climate change and its effect on populations, especially those vulnerable to displacement.  Innovations like digital cash transfers, mobile health services and data driven risk assessment can significantly improve service delivery, particularly for marginalized and remote populations.  Social protection systems must consider the interests of vulnerable segments of societies, particularly women, youth, older people and persons with disabilities.

    Angela Chomba Kawandami, Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services, Zambia, said that social protection systems are central to addressing vulnerabilities, reducing poverty and mitigating the impacts of various risks such as climate change, pandemics and economic crises.  “Social protection systems in Zambia are designed to address both short-term needs and long-term vulnerabilities,” she added.  These systems include cash transfers, food assistance and social insurance schemes.  “The goal is to ensure that individuals, especially those in our rural areas, older persons, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups, have access to basic services and support mechanisms,” she emphasized.  Zambia’s social protection programmes aim to reduce vulnerability by providing financial support to households living below the poverty line.  Climate change is also included into Zambia’s protection system as the phenomenon poses an increasing threat with more frequent droughts and floods.

    Héctor Ramón Cárdenas Molinas, Executive Director of the Technical Unit of the Social Cabinet of the President of Paraguay, said that extreme weather events cause major damage and loss.  “Most of them are linked to climate events,” he said, noting their high economic and social impact.  Exposure depends not only on geographic location but also on the development policies and adaptation measures taken to mitigate the risks of climate change.  “It is absolutely essential that we integrate policies and strategies that promote sustainable and resilient development,” he said.  Underscoring other initiatives in health, education and poverty eradication, he said Paraguay aims to ensure that services meet very high standards in terms of efficiency and effectiveness.  “The main challenge remains financing,” he added.

    Edgilson Tavares de Araújo, Ministry of Development and Social Assistance, Brazil, said that Brazil’s social protection system is based on the principles of universality, equity and democracy.  “Since 2023, we have seen a drop of 84 per cent in severe food insecurity, according to a 2024 UN survey,” he added.  With the creation of a global alliance to fight hunger and poverty, Brazil hopes to continue to make progress.  A strong State working with a healthy civil society must be resilient to truly transform society.  “We are increasing our budgetary commitments and broadening our global alliance to combat hunger and poverty,” he went on to say.  Brazil is committed to providing decent employment and “an economy of solidarity” which can help build social resilience.  “Being protected means having someone to rely on,” he added.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI: Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. Reports 2024 Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ARCHBOLD, Ohio, Feb. 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: FMAO) today reported financial results for the 2024 fourth quarter and twelve months ended December 31, 2024.

    2024 Fourth Quarter Financial and Operating Highlights (on a year-over-year basis unless noted):

    • 87 consecutive quarters of profitability
    • Net income increased 51.2% to $8.4 million, or $0.61 per basic and diluted share, from $5.5 million, or $0.41 per basic and diluted share
    • Asset quality remains at historically strong levels with nonperforming loans of only $3.1 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $22.4 million at December 31, 2023
    • Net charge-offs to average loans were 0.00%
    • Allowance for credit losses was 826.70% of nonperforming loans
    • Tier 1 leverage ratio was 8.12%
    • Net interest margin increased 27 basis points to 2.84%
    • Efficiency ratio improved to 59.82%, compared to 69.23% for the same period a year ago

    2024 Full-Year Financial Highlights Include (on a year-over-year basis unless noted):

    • Total loans, net were $2.56 billion at December 31, 2024, compared to $2.58 billion at December 31, 2023 and $2.54 billion at September 30, 2024
    • Total assets increased 2.5% to $3.36 billion
    • Deposits increased 3.0% to a record $2.69 billion
    • Stockholders’ equity increased 5.9% to $335.2 million
    • Net interest income after provision for credit losses increased 7.5% to $85.6 million
    • Return on average tangible equity was 8.91%
    • F&M ended 2024 with excellent liquidity levels, and over $690 million in contingent funding sources, and a cash-to-assets ratio of 5.3%, compared to 4.3% at December 31, 2023
    • Dividend raised 3.8% year-over-year, representing the 30th consecutive annual increase in the Company’s regular dividend payment since 1994

    Lars B. Eller, President and Chief Executive Officer, stated, “Our strong 2024 financial performance reflects solid execution of our multi-year strategic plan, as we have remained focused on continual improvements, managing the items under our control, and providing our customers and communities with outstanding, and local financial services. Thanks to the unwavering dedication of our team and the trust of our customers, F&M’s financial and operating results strengthened throughout 2024. This performance creates a solid foundation and further solidifies F&M’s position as a leading community bank in the Ohio, Indiana and Michigan markets we serve.”

    Mr. Eller continued, “Strong earnings growth in 2024 was driven by the success of ongoing strategies aimed at expanding our net interest margin, maintaining excellent asset quality, and driving efficiencies across our business. Core earnings for the 2024 fourth quarter were strong as net interest income after provision for credit losses increased 16.1% year-over-year to a quarterly record of $22.6 million, and noninterest income expanded 4.1% year-over-year to $4.0 million. We believe these trends highlight the improvements we have made to profitability, and we expect these trends to continue in the second half 2025.”

    Income Statement
    Net income for the 2024 fourth quarter ended December 31, 2024, was $8.4 million, compared to $5.5 million for the same period last year. Net income per basic and diluted share for the 2024 fourth quarter was $0.61, compared to $0.41 for the same period last year. Net income for the 2024 twelve months ended December 31, 2024, was $25.9 million, compared to $22.8 million for the same period last year. Net income per basic and diluted share for the 2024 twelve months was $1.90, compared to $1.67 for the same period last year.

    Deposits
    At December 31, 2024, total deposits were a record $2.69 billion, an increase of 3.0% from December 31, 2023. The Company’s cost of interest-bearing liabilities was 3.01% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to 3.02% for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. For the 2024 twelve months ended December 31, 2024, F&M’s cost of interest-bearing liabilities was 3.12%, compared to 2.53% in the prior year reflecting the higher rate environment and growth in interest-bearing checking and savings accounts.  

    Mr. Eller commented, “Throughout 2024, we pursued strategies aimed at optimizing our deposit base and growing low-cost checking (DDA) deposits. Since the beginning of 2024, we added nearly 7,500 new checking accounts, and benefited from new and expanded relationships at offices that were opened in 2023. As a result, we ended 2024 with a loan-to-deposit ratio of 94.4%, compared to 98.0% at December 31, 2023.”

    Loan Portfolio and Asset Quality
    “While the demand for loans is high across our markets, our approach to risk and pricing remains prudent. This strategy has contributed to historically strong asset quality over the past two quarters and is a testament to F&M’s risk, lending, and compliance capabilities and high-performing teams.   We expect loan growth to increase modestly in 2025, with growth weighted in the back half of the year. In addition, 31.4% of our loan portfolio is subject to reprice in the next 12 months. We believe these favorable trends will contribute to higher net interest income in 2025,” continued Mr. Eller.

    Total loans, net at December 31, 2024, decreased 0.7%, or by $19.3 million to $2.56 billion, compared to $2.58 billion at December 31, 2023. The year-over-year decline was driven primarily by lower consumer real estate, consumer, and agricultural real estate loans, partially offset primarily by higher commercial and industrial and agricultural loans. Compared to the quarter ended September 30, 2024, total loans, net at December 31, 2024 increased by 0.9% or $23.5 million.

    F&M continues to closely monitor its loan portfolio with a particular emphasis on higher risk sectors. Nonperforming loans were $3.1 million, or 0.12% of total loans at December 31, 2024, compared to $22.4 million, or 0.87% of total loans at December 31, 2023, and $2.9 million, or 0.11% at September 30, 2024.

    F&M maintains a well-balanced, diverse and high performing CRE portfolio. CRE loans represented 51.2% of the Company’s total loan portfolio at December 31, 2024. In addition, F&M’s commercial real estate office credit exposure represented 5.2% of the Company’s total loan portfolio at December 31, 2024, with a weighted average loan-to-value of approximately 64% and an average loan of approximately $958,100.

    F&M’s CRE portfolio included the following categories at December 31, 2024:

    CRE Category

      Dollar
    Balance
      Percent of
    CRE
    Portfolio
    (*)
      Percent of
    Total Loan
    Portfolio
    (*)
                 
    Industrial   $ 269,315   20.6%   10.5%
    Multi-family     233,868   17.8%   9.1%
    Retail     219,395   16.7%   8.6%
    Hotels     141,514   10.8%   5.5%
    Office     134,139   10.2%   5.2%
    Gas Stations     70,767   5.4%   2.8%
    Food Service     49,246   3.8%   1.9%
    Senior Living     31,799   2.4%   1.3%
    Development     29,491   2.3%   1.2%
    Auto Dealers     28,081   2.1%   1.1%
    Other     103,196   7.9%   4.0%
    Total CRE   $ 1,310,811   100.0%   51.2%

    * Numbers have been rounded

    At December 31, 2024, the Company’s allowance for credit losses to nonperforming loans was 826.70%, compared to 111.95% at December 31, 2023. The allowance to total loans was 1.07% at December 31, 2024, compared to 1.06% at December 31, 2023. Including accretable yield adjustments, associated with the Company’s prior acquisitions, F&M’s allowance for credit losses to total loans was 1.08% at December 31, 2024, compared to 1.13% at December 31, 2023.

    Mr. Eller concluded, “Throughout the new year, we will leverage F&M’s strong banking platform, while continuing to make strategic investments that expanded our operations, capabilities, and services. We believe this will expand operating efficiencies and produce better outcomes for our customers. I am proud of our strong performance in 2024, and expect 2025 to be another good year for F&M.”

    Stockholders’ Equity and Dividends
    Total stockholders’ equity increased 5.9% to $335.2 million, or $24.47 per share at December 31, 2024, from $316.5 million, or $23.17 per share at December 31, 2023. The Company’s Tier 1 leverage ratio of 8.12%, remained stable compared to December 31, 2023.

    Tangible stockholders’ equity increased to $270.0 million at December 31, 2024, compared to $254.2 million at December 31, 2023. On a per share basis, tangible stockholders’ equity at December 31, 2024, was $17.74 per share, compared to $16.29 per share at December 31, 2023.

    For the twelve months ended December 31, 2024, the Company declared cash dividends of $0.8825 per share, representing a 3.8% increase over the same period last year. F&M is committed to returning capital to shareholders and has increased the annual cash dividend for 30 consecutive years. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2024, the dividend payout ratio was 46.07% compared to 50.65% for the same period last year.

    About Farmers & Merchants State Bank:
    F&M Bank is a local independent community bank that has been serving its communities since 1897. F&M Bank provides commercial banking, retail banking and other financial services. Our locations are in Butler, Champaign, Fulton, Defiance, Hancock, Henry, Lucas, Shelby, Williams, and Wood counties in Ohio. In Northeast Indiana, we have offices located in Adams, Allen, DeKalb, Jay, Steuben and Wells counties. The Michigan footprint includes Oakland County, and we have Loan Production Offices in Troy, Michigan; Muncie, Indiana; and Perrysburg and Bryan, Ohio.

    Safe Harbor Statement
    Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. (“F&M”) wishes to take advantage of the Safe Harbor provisions included in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements by F&M, including management’s expectations and comments, may not be based on historical facts and are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21B of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Actual results could vary materially depending on risks and uncertainties inherent in general and local banking conditions, competitive factors specific to markets in which F&M and its subsidiaries operate, future interest rate levels, legislative and regulatory decisions, capital market conditions, or the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its impacts on our credit quality and business operations, as well as its impact on general economic and financial market conditions. F&M assumes no responsibility to update this information. For more details, please refer to F&M’s SEC filing, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. Such filings can be viewed at the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov or through F&M’s website www.fm.bank.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    This press release includes disclosure of financial measures not prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP). A non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are required to be disclosed by GAAP. Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. believes that these non-GAAP financial measures provide both management and investors a more complete understanding of the underlying operational results and trends and Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc.’s marketplace performance. The presentation of this additional information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the numbers prepared in accordance with GAAP. A reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures is included within this press release.

    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME & COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
    (Unaudited) (in thousands of dollars, except per share data)
     
      Three Months Ended     Twelve Months Ended
      December 31,
    2024
        September 30,
    2024
        June 30,
    2024
        March 31,
    2024
        December 31,
    2023
        December 31,
    2024
        December 31,
    2023
     
    Interest Income                                        
    Loans, including fees $ 36,663     $ 36,873     $ 36,593     $ 35,200     $ 34,493     $ 145,329     $ 129,344  
    Debt securities:                                        
    U.S. Treasury and government agencies 1,882     1,467     1,148     1,045     987     5,542     4,090  
    Municipalities 384     387     389     394     397     1,554     1,598  
    Dividends 367     334     327     333     365     1,361     882  
    Federal funds sold 24     7     7     7     8     45     44  
    Other 2,531     2,833     2,702     1,675     2,020     9,741     3,850  
    Total interest income 41,851     41,901     41,166     38,654     38,270     163,572     139,808  
    Interest Expense                                        
    Deposits 15,749     16,947     16,488     15,279     15,015     64,463     46,923  
    Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase 274     277     276     284     293     1,111     1,474  
    Borrowed funds 2,713     2,804     2,742     2,689     2,742     10,948     8,876  
    Subordinated notes 285     284     285     284     285     1,138     1,138  
    Total interest expense 19,021     20,312     19,791     18,536     18,335     77,660     58,411  
    Net Interest Income – Before Provision for Credit Losses 22,830     21,589     21,375     20,118     19,935     85,912     81,397  
    Provision for (Recovery of) Credit Losses – Loans 346     282     605     (289 )   278     944     1,698  
    Provision for (Recovery of) Credit Losses – Off Balance Sheet Credit Exposures (120 )   (267 )   (18 )   (266 )   189     (671 )   46  
    Net Interest Income After Provision for Credit Losses 22,604     21,574     20,788     20,673     19,468     85,639     79,653  
    Noninterest Income                                        
    Customer service fees 237     300     189     598     415     1,324     1,332  
    Other service charges and fees 1,176     1,155     1,085     1,057     1,090     4,473     4,343  
    Interchange income 1,322     1,315     1,330     1,429     1,310     5,396     5,318  
    Loan servicing income 771     710     513     539     666     2,533     4,405  
    Net gain on sale of loans 223     215     314     107     230     859     699  
    Increase in cash surrender value of bank owned life insurance 248     265     236     216     216     965     834  
    Net gain (loss) on sale of other assets owned 22         49         (86 )   71     (135 )
    Net loss on sale of available-for-sale securities                         (891 )
    Total noninterest income 3,999     3,960     3,716     3,946     3,841     15,621     15,905  
    Noninterest Expense                                        
    Salaries and wages 7,020     7,713     7,589     7,846     6,981     30,168     26,915  
    Employee benefits 2,148     2,112     2,112     2,171     1,218     8,543     7,520  
    Net occupancy expense 1,072     1,054     999     1,027     1,187     4,152     3,833  
    Furniture and equipment 1,032     1,472     1,407     1,353     1,370     5,264     5,022  
    Data processing 160     339     448     500     785     1,447     3,147  
    Franchise taxes 312     410     265     555     308     1,542     1,487  
    ATM expense 328     472     397     473     665     1,670     2,611  
    Advertising 498     597     519     530     397     2,144     2,606  
    FDIC assessment 505     516     507     580     594     2,108     1,982  
    Servicing rights amortization – net 244     219     187     168     182     818     611  
    Loan expense 236     244     251     229     246     960     1,055  
    Consulting fees 242     251     198     186     192     877     832  
    Professional fees 368     453     527     445     331     1,793     1,430  
    Intangible asset amortization 446     445     444     445     446     1,780     1,780  
    Other general and administrative 1,465     1,128     1,495     1,333     1,532     5,421     6,373  
    Total noninterest expense 16,076     17,425     17,345     17,841     16,434     68,687     67,204  
    Income Before Income Taxes 10,527     8,109     7,159     6,778     6,875     32,573     28,354  
    Income Taxes 2,146     1,593     1,477     1,419     1,332     6,635     5,567  
    Net Income 8,381     6,516     5,682     5,359     5,543     25,938     22,787  
    Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (Net of Tax):                                        
    Net unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale securities (7,403 )   11,664     2,531     (1,995 )   13,261     4,797     10,781  
    Reclassification adjustment for realized loss on sale of available-for-sale securities                         891  
    Net unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale securities (7,403 )   11,664     2,531     (1,995 )   13,261     4,797     11,672  
    Tax expense (benefit) (1,554 )   2,449     531     (418 )   2,784     1,008     2,451  
    Other comprehensive income (loss) (5,849 )   9,215     2,000     (1,577 )   10,477     3,789     9,221  
    Comprehensive Income $ 2,532     $ 15,731     $ 7,682     $ 3,782     $ 16,020     $ 29,727     $ 32,008  
    Basic Earnings Per Share $ 0.61     $ 0.48     $ 0.42     $ 0.39     $ 0.41     $ 1.90     $ 1.67  
    Diluted Earnings Per Share $ 0.61     $ 0.48     $ 0.42     $ 0.39     $ 0.41     $ 1.90     $ 1.67  
    Dividends Declared $ 0.22125     $ 0.22125     $ 0.22     $ 0.22     $ 0.22     $ 0.88250     $ 0.85  
                                             
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (Unaudited) (in thousands of dollars, except per share data)
     
      December 31,
    2024
        September 30,
    2024
        June 30,
    2024
        March 31,
    2024
        December 31,
    2023
     
            (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)        
    Assets                            
    Cash and due from banks $                       174,855     $                       244,572     $                     191,785     $                     186,541     $                      140,917  
    Federal funds sold 1,496     932     1,283     1,241     1,284  
    Total cash and cash equivalents 176,351     245,504     193,068     187,782     142,201  
                                 
    Interest-bearing time deposits 2,482     2,727     3,221     2,735     2,740  
    Securities – available-for-sale 426,556     404,881     365,209     347,516     358,478  
    Other securities, at cost 14,400     15,028     14,721     14,744     17,138  
    Loans held for sale 2,996     1,706     1,628     2,410     1,576  
    Loans, net of allowance for credit losses of $25,826 12/31/24 and $25,024 12/31/23 2,536,043     2,512,852     2,534,468     2,516,687     2,556,167  
    Premises and equipment 33,828     33,779     34,507     35,007     35,790  
    Construction in progress     35     38     9     8  
    Goodwill 86,358     86,358     86,358     86,358     86,358  
    Loan servicing rights 5,656     5,644     5,504     5,555     5,648  
    Bank owned life insurance 34,872     34,624     34,359     34,123     33,907  
    Other assets 45,181     46,047     49,552     54,628     43,218  
    Total Assets $                    3,364,723     $                    3,389,185     $                  3,322,633     $                  3,287,554     $                   3,283,229  
                                 
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                            
    Liabilities                            
    Deposits                            
    Noninterest-bearing $                       516,904     $                       481,444     $                     479,069     $                     510,731     $                      528,465  
    Interest-bearing                            
    NOW accounts 850,462     865,617     821,145     829,236     816,790  
    Savings 671,818     661,565     673,284     635,430     599,191  
    Time 647,581     676,187     667,592     645,985     663,017  
    Total deposits 2,686,765     2,684,813     2,641,090     2,621,382     2,607,463  
                                 
    Federal funds purchased and securities                            
    sold under agreements to repurchase 27,218     27,292     27,218     28,218     28,218  
    Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances 246,056     263,081     266,102     256,628     265,750  
    Subordinated notes, net of unamortized issuance costs 34,818     34,789     34,759     34,731     34,702  
    Dividend payable 2,996     2,998     2,975     2,975     2,974  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities 31,659     40,832     27,825     25,930     27,579  
    Total liabilities 3,029,512     3,053,805     2,999,969     2,969,864     2,966,686  
                                 
    Commitments and Contingencies                            
                                 
    Stockholders’ Equity                            
    Common stock – No par value 20,000,000 shares authorized; issued                            
    14,564,425 shares 12/31/24 and 12/31/23; outstanding 13,699,536 135,565     135,193     135,829     135,482     135,515  
    shares 12/31/24 and 13,664,641 shares 12/31/23                            
    Treasury stock – 864,889 shares 12/31/24 and 899,784 shares 12/31/23 (10,985 )   (10,904 )   (11,006 )   (10,851 )   (11,040 )
    Retained earnings 235,854     230,465     226,430     223,648     221,080  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss (25,223 )   (19,374 )   (28,589 )   (30,589 )   (29,012 )
    Total stockholders’ equity 335,211     335,380     322,664     317,690     316,543  
                                 
    Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity $                    3,364,723     $                    3,389,185     $                  3,322,633     $                  3,287,554     $                   3,283,229  
                                 
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    SELECT FINANCIAL DATA
                                               
        For the Three Months Ended   For the Twelve Months Ended
    Selected financial data   December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
    Return on average assets     0.99%     0.78%     0.69%     0.66%     0.67%     0.78%     0.71%
    Return on average equity     10.00%     7.93%     7.13%     6.76%     7.27%     7.98%     7.46%
    Yield on earning assets     5.20%     5.27%     5.22%     5.00%     4.93%     5.17%     4.67%
    Cost of interest bearing liabilities     3.01%     3.21%     3.18%     3.06%     3.02%     3.12%     2.53%
    Net interest spread     2.19%     2.06%     2.04%     1.94%     1.91%     2.05%     2.14%
    Net interest margin     2.84%     2.71%     2.71%     2.60%     2.57%     2.72%     2.72%
    Efficiency     59.82%     67.98%     69.03%     74.08%     69.23%     67.54%     68.48%
    Dividend payout ratio     35.75%     45.99%     52.35%     55.52%     54.23%     46.07%     50.65%
    Tangible book value per share   $ 17.74   $ 17.72   $ 16.79   $ 16.39   $ 16.29            
    Tier 1 leverage ratio     8.12%     8.04%     8.02%     8.40%     8.20%            
    Average shares outstanding     13,699,869     13,687,119     13,681,501     13,671,166     13,665,773     13,679,955     13,641,336
                                               
    Loans   December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
               
    (Dollar amounts in thousands)                                          
    Commercial real estate   $ 1,310,811   $ 1,301,160   $ 1,303,598   $ 1,304,400   $ 1,337,766            
    Agricultural real estate     216,401     220,328     222,558     227,455     223,791            
    Consumer real estate     520,114     524,055     525,902     525,178     521,895            
    Commercial and industrial     275,152     260,732     268,426     256,051     254,935            
    Agricultural     152,080     137,252     142,909     127,670     132,560            
    Consumer     63,009     67,394     70,918     74,819     79,591            
    Other     24,978     25,916     26,449     26,776     30,136            
    Less: Net deferred loan fees, costs and other (1)     (676)     1,499     (1,022)     (982)     517            
    Total loans, net   $ 2,561,869   $ 2,538,336   $ 2,559,738   $ 2,541,367   $ 2,581,191            
                                               
                                               
    Asset quality data   December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
               
    (Dollar amounts in thousands)                                          
    Nonaccrual loans   $ 3,124   $ 2,898   $ 2,487   $ 19,391   $ 22,353            
    90 day past due and accruing   $   $   $   $   $            
    Nonperforming loans   $ 3,124   $ 2,898   $ 2,487   $ 19,391   $ 22,353            
    Other real estate owned   $   $   $   $   $            
    Nonperforming assets   $ 3,124   $ 2,898   $ 2,487   $ 19,391   $ 22,353            
                                               
                                               
    Allowance for credit losses   $ 25,826   $ 25,484   $ 25,270   $ 24,680   $ 25,024            
    Allowance for unfunded     1,541     1,661     1,928     1,946     2,212            
    Total allowance for credit losses   $ 27,367   $ 27,145   $ 27,198   $ 26,626   $ 27,236            
    Total allowance for credit losses/total loans     1.07%     1.07%     1.06%     1.05%     1.06%            
    Adjusted credit losses with accretable yield/total loans     1.08%     1.10%     1.10%     1.11%     1.13%            
    Net charge-offs:                                          
    Quarter-to-date   $ 4   $ 68   $ 15   $ 55   $ 531            
    Year-to-date   $ 142   $ 138   $ 70   $ 55   $ 551            
    Net charge-offs to average loans                                          
    Quarter-to-date     0.00%     0.00%     0.00%     0.00%     0.02%            
    Year-to-date     0.01%     0.01%     0.00%     0.00%     0.02%            
    Nonperforming loans/total loans     0.12%     0.11%     0.10%     0.76%     0.87%            
    Allowance for credit losses/nonperforming loans     826.70%     879.37%     1016.08%     127.28%     111.95%            
    NPA coverage ratio     826.70%     879.37%     1016.08%     127.28%     111.95%            
                                               
    (1) Includes carrying value adjustments of $1.1 million as of December 31, 2024, $3.0 million as of September 30, 2024, $612 thousand as of June 30, 2024, $969 thousand as of March 31, 2024 and $2.7 million as of December 31, 2023 related to interest rate swaps
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND RELATED YIELDS AND RATES
    (in thousands of dollars, except percentages)
                               
      For the Three Months Ended     For the Three Months Ended  
      December 31, 2024     December 31, 2023  
    Interest Earning Assets: Average
    Balance
      Interest/
    Dividends
      Annualized
    Yield/Rate
        Average
    Balance
      Interest/
    Dividends
      Annualized
    Yield/Rate
     
    Loans $            2,543,628   $                    36,663   5.77 %   $            2,553,023   $                    34,493   5.41 %
    Taxable investment securities 450,648   2,554   2.27 %   386,931   1,660   1.72 %
    Tax-exempt investment securities 18,571   79   2.15 %   24,145   89   1.87 %
    Fed funds sold & other 209,307   2,555   4.88 %   142,642   2,028   5.69 %
    Total Interest Earning Assets 3,222,154   $                    41,851   5.20 %   3,106,741   $                    38,270   4.93 %
                               
    Nonearning Assets 174,172             189,202          
                               
    Total Assets $            3,396,326             $            3,295,943          
                               
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                          
    Savings deposits $            1,548,638   $                      9,459   2.44 %   $            1,392,304   $                      8,570   2.46 %
    Other time deposits 666,896   6,290   3.77 %   701,347   6,445   3.68 %
    Other borrowed money 255,490   2,713   4.25 %   265,948   2,742   4.12 %
    Fed funds purchased & securities                          
    sold under agreement to repurchase 27,341   274   4.01 %   28,739   293   4.08 %
    Subordinated notes 34,799   285   3.28 %   34,683   285   3.29 %
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities $            2,533,164   $                    19,021   3.01 %   $            2,423,021   $                    18,335   3.02 %
                               
    Noninterest Bearing Liabilities 527,751             567,813          
                               
    Stockholders’ Equity $               335,411             $               305,109          
                               
    Net Interest Income and Interest Rate Spread     $                    22,830   2.19 %       $                    19,935   1.91 %
                               
    Net Interest Margin         2.84 %           2.57 %
                               
    Yields on Tax exempt securities and the portion of the tax-exempt IDB loans included in loans have been tax adjusted based on a 21% tax rate in the charts
                               
                               
      For the Twelve Months Ended     For the Twelve Months Ended  
      December 31, 2024     December 31, 2023  
    Interest Earning Assets: Average
    Balance
      Interest/
    Dividends
      Annualized
    Yield/Rate
        Average
    Balance
      Interest/
    Dividends
      Annualized
    Yield/Rate
     
    Loans $            2,557,213   $                  145,329   5.68 %   $            2,491,502   $                  129,344   5.19 %
    Taxable investment securities 410,764   8,129   1.98 %   394,424   6,204   1.57 %
    Tax-exempt investment securities 20,154   328   2.06 %   24,686   366   1.88 %
    Fed funds sold & other 176,307   9,786   5.55 %   85,018   3,894   4.58 %
    Total Interest Earning Assets 3,164,438   $                  163,572   5.17 %   2,995,630   $                  139,808   4.67 %
                               
    Nonearning Assets 164,464             197,726          
                               
    Total Assets $            3,328,902             $            3,193,356          
                               
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                          
    Savings deposits $            1,502,365   $                    39,750   2.65 %   $            1,376,318   $                    27,424   1.99 %
    Other time deposits 663,320   24,713   3.73 %   640,390   19,499   3.04 %
    Other borrowed money 262,094   10,948   4.18 %   220,175   8,876   4.03 %
    Fed funds purchased & securities                          
    sold under agreement to repurchase 27,750   1,111   4.00 %   35,421   1,474   4.16 %
    Subordinated notes 34,755   1,138   3.27 %   34,640   1,138   3.29 %
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities $            2,490,284   $                    77,660   3.12 %   $            2,306,944   $                    58,411   2.53 %
                               
    Noninterest Bearing Liabilities 513,588             580,931          
                               
    Stockholders’ Equity $               325,030             $                305,481          
                               
    Net Interest Income and Interest Rate Spread     $                    85,912   2.05 %       $                    81,397   2.14 %
                               
    Net Interest Margin         2.72 %           2.72 %
                               
    Yields on Tax exempt securities and the portion of the tax-exempt IDB loans included in loans have been tax adjusted based on a 21% tax rate in the charts
    FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND RELATED YIELDS AND RATES
    (in thousands of dollars, except percentages)
     
      For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2024   For the Three Months Ended December 31, 2023
      As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort   Difference   As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort   Difference
      $ Yield     $ Yield     $   Yield     $ Yield     $ Yield     $   Yield  
    Interest Earning Assets:                                                  
    Loans $         36,663 5.77 %   $     36,039 5.67 %   $          624   0.10 %   $         34,493 5.41 %   $     33,769 5.29 %   $          724   0.12 %
    Taxable investment securities 2,554 2.27 %   2,554 2.27 %     0.00 %   1,660 1.72 %   1,660 1.72 %     0.00 %
    Tax-exempt investment securities 79 2.15 %   79 2.15 %     0.00 %   89 1.87 %   89 1.87 %     0.00 %
    Fed funds sold & other 2,555 4.88 %   2,555 4.88 %     0.00 %   2,028 5.69 %   2,028 5.69 %     0.00 %
    Total Interest Earning Assets 41,851 5.20 %   41,227 5.12 %   624   0.08 %   38,270 4.93 %   37,546 4.84 %   724   0.09 %
                                                       
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                                                  
    Savings deposits $           9,459 2.44 %   $       9,459 2.44 %   $             –   0.00 %   $           8,570 2.46 %   $       8,570 2.46 %   $             –   0.00 %
    Other time deposits 6,290 3.77 %   6,290 3.77 %     0.00 %   6,445 3.68 %   6,381 3.64 %   64   0.04 %
    Other borrowed money 2,713 4.25 %   2,710 4.24 %   3   0.01 %   2,742 4.12 %   2,760 4.15 %   (18 ) -0.03 %
    Federal funds purchased  and                                                  
    securities sold under agreement to                                                  
    repurchase 274 4.01 %   274 4.01 %     0.00 %   293 4.08 %   293 4.08 %     0.00 %
    Subordinated notes 285 3.28 %   285 3.28 %     0.00 %   285 3.29 %   285 3.29 %     0.00 %
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities 19,021 3.01 %   19,018 3.00 %   3   0.01 %   18,335 3.02 %   18,289 3.02 %   46   0.00 %
                                                       
    Interest/Dividend income/yield 41,851 5.20 %   41,227 5.12 %   624   0.08 %   38,270 4.93 %   37,546 4.84 %   724   0.09 %
    Interest Expense / yield 19,021 3.01 %   19,018 3.00 %   3   0.01 %   18,335 3.02 %   18,289 3.02 %   46   0.00 %
    Net Interest Spread 22,830 2.19 %   22,209 2.12 %   621   0.07 %   19,935 1.91 %   19,257 1.82 %   678   0.09 %
    Net Interest Margin   2.84 %     2.76 %       0.08 %     2.57 %     2.48 %       0.09 %
                                                       
      For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2024   For the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2023
      As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort   Difference   As Reported   Excluding Acc/Amort   Difference
      $ Yield     $ Yield     $   Yield     $ Yield     $ Yield     $   Yield  
    Interest Earning Assets:                                                  
    Loans $       145,329 5.68 %   $   142,627 5.58 %   $       2,702   0.10 %   $       129,344 5.19 %   $   126,133 5.06 %   $       3,211   0.13 %
    Taxable investment securities 8,129 1.98 %   8,129 1.98 %     0.00 %   6,204 1.57 %   6,204 1.57 %     0.00 %
    Tax-exempt investment securities 328 2.06 %   328 2.06 %     0.00 %   366 1.88 %   366 1.88 %     0.00 %
    Fed funds sold & other 9,786 5.55 %   9,786 5.55 %     0.00 %   3,894 4.58 %   3,894 4.58 %     0.00 %
    Total Interest Earning Assets 163,572 5.17 %   160,870 5.09 %   2,702   0.08 %   139,808 4.67 %   136,597 4.57 %   3,211   0.10 %
                                                       
    Interest Bearing Liabilities:                                                  
    Savings deposits $         39,750 2.65 %   $     39,750 2.65 %   $             –   0.00 %   $         27,424 1.99 %   $     27,424 1.99 %   $             –   0.00 %
    Other time deposits 24,713 3.73 %   24,713 3.73 %     0.00 %   19,499 3.04 %   19,839 3.10 %   (340 ) -0.06 %
    Other borrowed money 10,948 4.18 %   10,964 4.18 %   (16 ) 0.00 %   8,876 4.03 %   8,947 4.06 %   (71 ) -0.03 %
    Federal funds purchased  and                                                  
    securities sold under agreement to                                                  
    repurchase 1,111 4.00 %   1,111 4.00 %     0.00 %   1,474 4.16 %   1,474 4.16 %     0.00 %
    Subordinated notes 1,138 3.27 %   1,138 3.27 %     0.00 %   1,138 3.29 %   1,138 3.29 %     0.00 %
    Total Interest Bearing Liabilities 77,660 3.12 %   77,676 3.12 %   (16 ) 0.00 %   58,411 2.53 %   58,822 2.55 %   (411 ) -0.02 %
                                                       
    Interest/Dividend income/yield 163,572 5.17 %   160,870 5.09 %   2,702   0.08 %   139,808 4.67 %   136,597 4.57 %   3,211   0.10 %
    Interest Expense / yield 77,660 3.12 %   77,676 3.12 %   (16 ) 0.00 %   58,411 2.53 %   58,822 2.55 %   (411 ) -0.02
    Net Interest Spread 85,912 2.05 %   83,194 1.97 %   2,718   0.08 %   81,397 2.14 %   77,775 2.02 %   3,622   0.12 %
    Net Interest Margin   2.72 %     2.63 %       0.09 %     2.72 %     2.60 %       0.12 %
    Company Contact: Investor and Media Contact:
    Lars B. Eller
    President and Chief Executive Officer
    Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc.
    (419) 446-2501
    leller@fm.bank
    Andrew M. Berger
    Managing Director
    SM Berger & Company, Inc.
    (216) 464-6400
    andrew@smberger.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Robinhood Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Q4 Revenues up 115% year-over-year to a record $1.01 billion.
    Q4 Net Deposits grow to a record $16 billion.
    Q4 Gold Subscribers up 86% year-over-year to a record 2.6 million.
    Q4 Net Income up over 10X year-over-year to a record $916 million, or Diluted EPS of a record $1.01.
    Q4 Adjusted EBITDA up over 300% year-over-year to a record $613 million.

    MENLO PARK, Calif., Feb. 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Robinhood Markets, Inc. (“Robinhood”) (NASDAQ: HOOD) today announced financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2024, which ended December 31, 2024.

    “We hit the gas on product development in 2024 with a new platform for active traders, Gold Card launch, an expanded UK and EU product suite, and much more,” said Vlad Tenev, CEO and Co-Founder of Robinhood. “We see a huge opportunity ahead of us as we work toward enabling anyone, anywhere, to buy, sell, or hold any financial asset and conduct any financial transaction through Robinhood.”

    “Q4 was a record-breaking quarter that caps off a record-setting year in 2024,” said Jason Warnick, Chief Financial Officer of Robinhood. “For both the quarter and full year, we reached new highs for Assets Under Custody, Net Deposits, Gold Subscribers, Revenues, Net Income, Adjusted EBITDA, and EPS. We’re entering 2025 with strong momentum as we remain focused on delivering another year of profitable growth.”

    Fourth Quarter Results:

    • Total net revenues increased 115% year-over-year to $1.01 billion.
      • Transaction-based revenues increased over 200% year-over-year to $672 million, primarily driven by cryptocurrencies revenue of $358 million, up over 700%, options revenue of $222 million, up 83%, and equities revenue of $61 million, up 144%.
      • Net interest revenues increased 25% year-over-year to $296 million, primarily driven by growth in interest-earning assets, partially offset by a lower federal funds rate.
      • Other revenues increased 31% year-over-year to $46 million, primarily due to increased Gold subscription revenues.
    • Net income increased over 10X year-over-year to $916 million, or diluted earnings per share (EPS) of $1.01, compared to $30 million, or diluted EPS of $0.03, in Q4 2023. Q4 2024 net income included:
      • a $369 million deferred tax benefit ($0.41 of diluted EPS), primarily from the release of the Company’s valuation allowance on most of its net deferred tax assets.
      • a $55 million benefit ($0.06 of diluted EPS) due to a reversal of an accrual as part of a regulatory settlement.
    • Total operating expenses increased 3% year-over-year to $458 million, including a $55 million benefit due to a reversal of an accrual as part of a regulatory settlement.
      • Adjusted Operating Expenses and Share-Based Compensation (SBC) (non-GAAP) increased 14% year-over-year to $508 million, which includes Adjusted Operating Expenses (non-GAAP) of $431 million and SBC of $77 million.
    • Adjusted EBITDA (non-GAAP) increased over 300% year-over-year to $613 million.
    • Funded Customers increased 8% year-over-year to 25.2 million.
      • Investment Accounts increased by 10% year-over-year to 26.2 million.
    • Assets Under Custody (AUC) increased 88% year-over-year to $193 billion, driven by continued Net Deposits and higher equity and cryptocurrency valuations.
    • Net Deposits were $16.1 billion, an annualized growth rate of 42% relative to AUC at the end of Q3 2024. Over the past twelve months, Net Deposits were $50.5 billion, a growth rate of 49% relative to AUC at the end of Q4 2023.
    • Average Revenue Per User (ARPU) increased by 102% year-over-year to $164.
    • Gold Subscribers increased by 1.2 million, or 86%, year-over-year to 2.6 million.
    • Cash and cash equivalents totaled $4.3 billion compared with $4.8 billion at the end of Q4 2023.
    • Share repurchases were $160 million, representing 5.3 million shares of our Class A common stock at an average price per share of $29.79.

    Full Year Results:

    • Total net revenues increased 58% year-over-year to $2.95 billion.
    • Net income increased $1.95 billion year-over-year to $1.41 billion, or diluted EPS of $1.56, compared to a net loss of $0.54 billion, or diluted EPS of -$0.61, in 2023.
      • 2024 included a deferred tax benefit of $369 million, primarily from the release of the Company’s valuation allowance on most of its net deferred tax assets.
      • 2023 included an expense of $485 million from the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation.
    • Total operating expenses decreased 21% year-over-year to $1.90 billion.
      • Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC decreased 16% year-over-year to $1.94 billion, which includes Adjusted Operating Expenses of $1.63 billion and SBC of $304 million.
      • Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation (non-GAAP) increased 7% year-over-year.
    • Adjusted EBITDA increased 167% year-over-year to $1.43 billion, compared to $536 million in 2023.
    • Share repurchases were $257 million, representing 10.4 million shares of our Class A common stock at an average price per share of $24.78 as we make progress on our $1 billion share repurchase program.

    Highlights

    Strong product momentum drove record growth in 2024 as Robinhood delivers on roadmap

    • Expanding Access to Crypto Across the U.S. and EU – Crypto notional volumes increased over 400 percent year-over-year, reaching $71 billion in Q4 2024. Since the start of Q4, Robinhood has also added seven crypto assets in the U.S. and launched Ethereum (ETH) staking in the EU. In June 2024, Robinhood entered into an agreement to acquire Bitstamp, the world’s longest running cryptocurrency exchange serving institutional and retail customers internationally. The acquisition is subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals, and is expected to close in the first half of 2025.
    • Establishing Ourselves as the #1 Platform for Active Traders – Last month, Robinhood made index options available to all customers and started to roll out futures trading directly in-app, allowing customers to trade stock indexes, energy, currency, metals and crypto. Additionally, since launching in October 2024, Robinhood Legend – the desktop trading platform built for active traders – has added nearly 30 additional indicators and rolled out crypto trading.
    • Robinhood Expands Global Ambitions – Robinhood announced plans to expand into the Asia-Pacific region in 2025, with Singapore serving as its local headquarters. Earlier this week, Robinhood also started to offer options trading to its UK customers.
    • Robinhood Gold Membership Continues to Climb – Robinhood Gold subscribers hit 2.6 million, with an adoption rate of over 10 percent in Q4. In addition, the Robinhood Gold Credit Card reached over 100 thousand cardholders and we have plans to continue expanding the cardholder base in 2025.
    • Stepping Into the Investment Advisory Space – In November 2024, Robinhood entered into an agreement to acquire TradePMR, a custodial and portfolio management platform for Registered Investment Advisors with over 25 years in the industry and over $40 billion in assets under administration at the time of signing. The acquisition is subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals, and is expected to close in the first half of 2025.

    Additional Q4 2024 Operating Data

    • Retirement AUC increased over 600% year-over-year to $13.1 billion.
    • Cash Sweep increased 59% year-over-year to $26.1 billion.
    • Margin Book increased 126% year-over-year to $7.9 billion.
    • Equity Notional Trading Volumes increased 154% year-over-year to $423 billion.
    • Options Contracts Traded increased 61% year-over-year to 477 million.
    • Crypto Notional Trading Volumes increased over 400% year-over-year to $71.0 billion.

    Conference Call and Livestream Information

    Robinhood will host a video call to discuss its results at 2 p.m. PT / 5 p.m. ET today, February 12, 2025. The video call can be accessed at investors.robinhood.com, along with the earnings press release and accompanying slide presentation. The event will also be live streamed to YouTube and X.com via Robinhood’s official channels, @RobinhoodApp.

    Following the call, a replay and transcript will also be available at investors.robinhood.com.

    Financial Outlook

    The paragraph below provides information on our 2025 expense plan and outlook. We are not providing a 2025 outlook for total operating expenses and have not reconciled our 2025 outlook for Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, total operating expenses, because we are unable to predict with reasonable certainty the impact of certain items without unreasonable effort. These items include, but are not limited to, provisions for credit losses and significant regulatory expenses which may be material and could have a significant impact on total operating expenses for 2025.

    Our 2025 expense plan includes growth investments in new products, features, and international expansion while also getting more efficient in our existing businesses. Our outlook for combined Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC for full-year 2025 is $2.0 billion to $2.1 billion. This expense outlook does not include provisions for credit losses, costs related to TradePMR or Bitstamp, potential significant regulatory matters, or other significant expenses (such as impairments, restructuring charges, and other business acquisition- or disposition-related expenses) that may arise or accruals we may determine in the future are required, as we are unable to accurately predict the size or timing of such matters, expenses or accruals at this time.

    Actual results might differ materially from our outlook due to several factors, including the rate of growth in Funded Customers and our effectiveness to cross-sell products which affects variable marketing costs, the degree to which we are successful in managing credit losses and preventing fraud, and our ability to manage web-hosting expenses efficiently, among other factors. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for more information on Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC, including significant items that we believe are not indicative of our ongoing expenses that would be adjusted out of total operating expenses (GAAP) to get to Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC (non-GAAP) should they occur.

    About Robinhood

    Robinhood Markets, Inc. (NASDAQ: HOOD) transformed financial services by introducing commission-free stock trading and democratizing access to the markets for millions of investors. Today, Robinhood lets you trade stocks, options, futures (which includes options on futures, swaps, and event contracts), and crypto, invest for retirement, and earn with Robinhood Gold. Headquartered in Menlo Park, California, Robinhood puts customers in the driver’s seat, delivering unprecedented value and products intentionally designed for a new generation of investors. Additional information about Robinhood can be found at www.robinhood.com.

    Robinhood uses the “Overview” tab of its Investor Relations website (accessible at investors.robinhood.com/overview) and its Newsroom (accessible at newsroom.aboutrobinhood.com), as means of disclosing information to the public in a broad, non-exclusionary manner for purposes of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg. FD). Investors should routinely monitor those web pages, in addition to Robinhood’s press releases, SEC filings, and public conference calls and webcasts, as information posted on them could be deemed to be material information.

    “Robinhood” and the Robinhood feather logo are registered trademarks of Robinhood Markets, Inc. All other names are trademarks and/or registered trademarks of their respective owners.

    Contacts

    Investors:
    ir@robinhood.com

    Press:
    press@robinhood.com

     
    ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (Unaudited)
     
      December 31,
    (in millions, except share and per share data)   2023       2024  
    Assets      
    Current assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 4,835     $ 4,332  
    Cash, cash equivalents, and securities segregated under federal and other regulations   4,448       4,724  
    Receivables from brokers, dealers, and clearing organizations   89       471  
    Receivables from users, net   3,495       8,239  
    Securities borrowed   1,602       3,236  
    Deposits with clearing organizations   338       489  
    User-held fractional shares   1,592       2,530  
    Held-to-maturity investments   413       398  
    Prepaid expenses   63       75  
    Deferred customer match incentives   11       100  
    Other current assets   196       509  
    Total current assets   17,082       25,103  
    Property, software, and equipment, net   120       139  
    Goodwill   175       179  
    Intangible assets, net   48       38  
    Non-current held-to-maturity investments   73        
    Non-current deferred customer match incentives   19       195  
    Other non-current assets, including non-current prepaid expenses of $4 as of December 31, 2023 and $17 as of December 31, 2024   107       533  
    Total assets $ 17,624     $ 26,187  
    Liabilities and stockholders’ equity      
    Current liabilities:      
    Accounts payable and accrued expenses $ 384     $ 397  
    Payables to users   5,097       7,448  
    Securities loaned   3,547       7,463  
    Fractional shares repurchase obligation   1,592       2,530  
    Other current liabilities   217       266  
    Total current liabilities   10,837       18,104  
    Other non-current liabilities   91       111  
    Total liabilities   10,928       18,215  
    Commitments and contingencies      
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value. 210,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2023 and December 31, 2024.          
    Class A common stock, $0.0001 par value. 21,000,000,000 shares authorized, 745,401,862 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2023; 21,000,000,000 shares authorized, 764,903,997 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024.          
    Class B common stock, $0.0001 par value. 700,000,000 shares authorized, 126,760,802 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2023; 700,000,000 shares authorized, 119,588,986 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024.          
    Class C common stock, $0.0001 par value. 7,000,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2023 and December 31, 2024.          
    Additional paid-in capital   12,145       12,008  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (3 )     (1 )
    Accumulated deficit   (5,446 )     (4,035 )
    Total stockholders’ equity   6,696       7,972  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 17,624     $ 26,187  
     
    ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (Unaudited)
     
     (in millions, except share, per share, and percentage data) Three Months Ended
    December 31,
      YOY% Change   Three Months Ended
    September 30,
      QOQ% Change
      2023       2024         2024  
    Revenues:                  
    Transaction-based revenues $ 200     $ 672     236 %   $ 319   111 %
    Net interest revenues   236       296     25 %     274   8 %
    Other revenues   35       46     31 %     44   5 %
    Total net revenues   471       1,014     115 %     637   59 %
                       
    Operating expenses(1)(2):                  
    Brokerage and transaction   32       50     56 %     39   28 %
    Technology and development   197       208     6 %     205   1 %
    Operations   26       29     12 %     27   7 %
    Provision for credit losses   14       19     36 %     23   (17)%
    Marketing   43       82     91 %     59   39 %
    General and administrative   133       70     (47)%     133   (47)%
    Total operating expenses   445       458     3 %     486   (6)%
                       
    Other income, net   3       2     (33)%     2   %
    Income before income taxes   29       558     NM     153   265 %
    Provision for (benefit from) income taxes   (1 )     (358 )   NM     3   NM
    Net income $ 30     $ 916     NM   $ 150   511 %
    Net income attributable to common stockholders:                  
    Basic $ 30     $ 916         $ 150    
    Diluted $ 30     $ 916         $ 150    
    Net income per share attributable to common stockholders:                  
    Basic $ 0.03     $ 1.04         $ 0.17    
    Diluted $ 0.03     $ 1.01         $ 0.17    
    Weighted-average shares used to compute net income per share attributable to common stockholders:                  
    Basic   867,298,537       883,884,676           884,108,545    
    Diluted   883,227,967       907,767,796           905,544,750    
     
        Year Ended
    December 31,
      YOY% Change
    (in millions, except share, per share, and percentage data)     2023       2024    
    Revenues:            
    Transaction-based revenues   $ 785     $ 1,647     110 %
    Net interest revenues     929       1,109     19 %
    Other revenues     151       195     29 %
    Total net revenues     1,865       2,951     58 %
                 
    Operating expenses(1)(2):            
    Brokerage and transaction     146       164     12 %
    Technology and development     805       818     2 %
    Operations     116       112     (3)%
    Provision for credit losses     43       76     77 %
    Marketing     122       272     123 %
    General and administrative     1,169       455     (61)%
    Total operating expenses     2,401       1,897     (21)%
                 
    Other income, net     3       10     233 %
    Income (loss) before income taxes     (533 )     1,064     NM
    Provision for (benefit from) income taxes     8       (347 )   NM
    Net income (loss)     (541 )     1,411     NM
    Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders:            
    Basic   $ (541 )   $ 1,411      
    Diluted   $ (541 )   $ 1,411      
    Net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:            
    Basic   $ (0.61 )   $ 1.60      
    Diluted   $ (0.61 )   $ 1.56      
    Weighted-average shares used to compute net income (loss) per share attributable to common stockholders:            
    Basic     890,857,659       881,113,156      
    Diluted     890,857,659       906,171,504      

    ________________
    (1) The following table presents operating expenses as a percent of total net revenues:

     
    Three Months Ended

    December 31,
      Three Months Ended
    September 30,
      Year Ended
    December 31,
      2023     2024     2024     2023     2024  
    Brokerage and transaction 7 %   5 %   6 %   8 %   5 %
    Technology and development 42 %   20 %   32 %   43 %   28 %
    Operations 6 %   3 %   4 %   6 %   4 %
    Provision for credit losses 2 %   2 %   4 %   3 %   3 %
    Marketing 9 %   8 %   9 %   7 %   9 %
    General and administrative 28 %   7 %   21 %   63 %   15 %
    Total operating expenses 94 %   45 %   76 %   130 %   64 %


    (2)
     The following table presents the SBC on our unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations for the periods indicated:

     
    Three Months Ended

    December 31,
      Three Months Ended
    September 30,
      Year Ended
    December 31,
    (in millions)   2023     2024     2024     2023     2024
    Brokerage and transaction $ 1   $ 2   $ 2   $ 7     9
    Technology and development   50     48     48     211     192
    Operations   2     2     1     8     7
    Marketing   2     2     3     5     8
    General and administrative   26     23     25     640     88
    Total SBC $ 81   $ 77 $ $ 79   $ 871   $ 304
     
    ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
    December 31,
      Year Ended
    December 31,
    (in millions)   2023       2024       2023       2024  
    Operating activities:              
    Net income (loss) $ 30     $ 916     $ (541 )   $ 1,411  
    Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:              
    Depreciation and amortization   17       22       71       77  
    Impairment of long-lived assets   4             5       2  
    Provision for credit losses   14       19       43       76  
    Deferred income taxes         (369 )           (369 )
    Share-based compensation   81       77       871       304  
    Other   1             3       (2 )
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities:              
    Securities segregated under federal and other regulations         (397 )           (397 )
    Receivables from brokers, dealers, and clearing organizations   (26 )     (332 )     (13 )     (382 )
    Receivables from users, net   204       (2,621 )     (298 )     (4,592 )
    Securities borrowed   (398 )     468       (1,085 )     (1,634 )
    Deposits with clearing organizations   (63 )     (25 )     (152 )     (151 )
    Current and non-current prepaid expenses   11       16       37       (25 )
    Current and non-current deferred customer match incentives   (20 )     (63 )     (30 )     (265 )
    Other current and non-current assets   (19 )     (404 )     (18 )     (415 )
    Accounts payable and accrued expenses   (11 )     (63 )     134       (35 )
    Payables to users   772       1,184       396       2,351  
    Securities loaned   302       157       1,713       3,916  
    Other current and non-current liabilities   61       15       45       (27 )
    Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities   960       (1,400 )     1,181       (157 )
    Investing activities:              
    Purchases of property, software, and equipment   (1 )     (4 )     (2 )     (13 )
    Capitalization of internally developed software   (5 )     (11 )     (19 )     (37 )
    Business acquisition, net of cash and cash equivalents acquired   (3 )           (93 )     (6 )
    Asset acquisition, net of cash acquired                     (3 )
    Purchases of held-to-maturity investments   (108 )     (87 )     (759 )     (556 )
    Proceeds from maturities of held-to-maturity investments   115       219       282       658  
    Purchases of credit card receivables by Credit Card Funding Trust         (509 )           (748 )
    Collections of purchased credit card receivables         426             556  
    Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale investments               10        
    Other   (1 )           (1 )     1  
    Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities   (3 )     34       (582 )     (148 )
    Financing activities:              
    Proceeds from exercise of stock options, net of repurchases   3       8       5       18  
    Proceeds from issuance of common stock under the Employee Share Purchase Plan   5       6       14       16  
    Taxes paid related to net share settlement of equity awards   (3 )     (89 )     (12 )     (244 )
    Repurchase of Class A common stock         (160 )     (608 )     (257 )
    Draws on credit facilities         10       20       22  
    Repayments on credit facilities         (10 )     (20 )     (22 )
    Borrowings by the Credit Card Funding Trust         37             132  
    Repayments on borrowings by the Credit Card Funding Trust                     (1 )
    Change in principal collected from customers due to Coastal Bank   4       21       1       6  
    Payments of debt issuance costs         (1 )     (10 )     (15 )
    Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities   9       (178 )     (610 )     (345 )
    Effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents         (2 )           (1 )
    Net increase (decrease) in cash, cash equivalents, segregated cash, and restricted cash   966       (1,546 )     (11 )     (651 )
    Cash, cash equivalents, segregated cash, and restricted cash, beginning of the period   8,380       10,241       9,357       9,346  
    Cash, cash equivalents, segregated cash, and restricted cash, end of the period $ 9,346     $ 8,695     $ 9,346     $ 8,695  
                   
    Reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents, segregated cash and restricted cash, end of the period:
    Cash and cash equivalents, end of the period $ 4,835     $ 4,332     $ 4,835     $ 4,332  
    Segregated cash and cash equivalents, end of the period   4,448       4,327       4,448       4,327  
    Restricted cash in other current assets, end of the period   46       18       46       18  
    Restricted cash in other non-current assets, end of the period   17       18       17       18  
    Cash, cash equivalents, segregated cash and restricted cash, end of the period $ 9,346     $ 8,695     $ 9,346     $ 8,695  
    Supplemental disclosures:              
    Cash paid for interest $ 4     $ 4     $ 12     $ 16  
    Cash paid for income taxes, net of refund received $     $ 4     $ 9     $ 18  
     
    Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Results
    (Unaudited)
     
        Three Months Ended
    December 31,
      Three Months Ended
    September 30,
      Year Ended
    December 31,
    (in millions)     2023       2024       2024       2023       2024  
    Net income (loss)   $ 30     $ 916     $ 150     $ (541 )   $ 1,411  
    Net margin     6 %     90 %     24 %   (29)%     48 %
    Add:                    
    Interest expenses related to credit facilities     6       6       6       23       24  
    Provision for (benefit from) income taxes     (1 )     (358 )     3       8       (347 )
    Depreciation and amortization     17       22       20       71       77  
    EBITDA (non-GAAP)     52       586       179       (439 )     1,165  
    Add: SBC                    
    SBC Excluding 2021 Founders Award Cancellation     81       77       79       386       304  
    2021 Founders Award Cancellation                       485        
    Significant legal and tax settlements and reserves(1)           (50 )     10       104       (40 )
    Adjusted EBITDA (non-GAAP)   $ 133     $ 613     $ 268     $ 536     $ 1,429  
    Adjusted EBITDA margin (non-GAAP)     28 %     60 %     42 %     29 %     48 %
      Three Months Ended
    December 31,
      Three Months Ended
    September 30,
      Year Ended
    December 31,
    (in millions)   2023     2024       2024     2023     2024  
    Total operating expenses (GAAP) $ 445   $ 458     $ 486   $ 2,401   $ 1,897  
    Less: SBC                  
    SBC Excluding 2021 Founders Award Cancellation   81     77       79     386     304  
    2021 Founders Award Cancellation                 485      
    Significant legal and tax settlements and reserves(1)       (50 )     10     104     (40 )
    Adjusted Operating Expenses (Non-GAAP) $ 364   $ 431     $ 397   $ 1,426   $ 1,633  
      Three Months Ended
    December 31,
      Year Ended
    December 31,
    (in millions)   2023     2024       2023     2024  
    Total operating expenses (GAAP) $ 445   $ 458     $ 2,401   $ 1,897  
    Less: SBC              
    SBC Excluding 2021 Founders Award Cancellation   81     77       386     304  
    2021 Founders Award Cancellation             485      
    Significant legal and tax settlements and reserves(1)       (50 )     104     (40 )
    Adjusted Operating Expenses (Non-GAAP)   364     431       1,426     1,633  
    Add: SBC              
    SBC Excluding 2021 Founders Award Cancellation   81     77       386     304  
    2021 Founders Award Cancellation             485      
    Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC (Non-GAAP)   445     508       2,297     1,937  
    Less: 2021 Founders Award Cancellation             485      
    Adjusted Operating Expense and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation (Non-GAAP) $ 445   $ 508     $ 1,812   $ 1,937  

    ________________

    (1) Amounts for the three months and year ended December 31, 2024 included a $55 million benefit due to a reversal of an accrual as part of a regulatory settlement.


    Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding the expected financial performance of Robinhood Markets, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries (“we,” “Robinhood,” or the “Company”) and our strategic and operational plans, including (among others) statements regarding that we see a huge opportunity ahead of us as we work toward enabling anyone, anywhere, to buy, sell, or hold any financial asset and conduct any financial transaction through Robinhood; that we’re entering 2025 with strong momentum as we remain focused on delivering another year of profitable growth; that we plan to expand into the Asia-Pacific region in 2025, with Singapore serving as our local headquarters; that we plan to continue expanding the cardholder base for the Robinhood Gold Credit Card in 2025; that the acquisitions of Bitstamp and TradePMR are each expected to close in the first half of 2025; and all statements and information under the headings “Financial Outlook”. Forward-looking statements generally relate to future events or our future financial or operating performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements because they contain words such as “believe,” “may,” “will” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “could,” “intend,” “target,” “project,” “contemplate,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” or “continue,” or the negative of these words or other similar terms or expressions that concern our expectations, strategy, plans, or intentions. Our forward-looking statements are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions, and other factors that may cause our actual future results, performance, or achievements to differ materially from any future results expressed or implied in this press release. Reported results should not be considered an indication of future performance. Factors that contribute to the uncertain nature of our forward-looking statements include, among others: our rapid and continuing expansion, including continuing to introduce new products and services on our platforms as well as geographic expansion; the difficulty of managing our business effectively, including the size of our workforce, and the risk of declining or negative growth; the fluctuations in our financial results and key metrics from quarter to quarter; our reliance on transaction-based revenue, including payment for order flow (“PFOF”), the risk of new regulation or bans on PFOF and similar practices, and the addition of our new fee-based model for cryptocurrency; our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates and rapidly changing interest rate environments; the difficulty of raising additional capital (to provide liquidity needs and support business growth and objectives) on reasonable terms, if at all; the need to maintain capital levels required by regulators and self-regulatory organizations; the risk that we might mishandle the cash, securities, and cryptocurrencies we hold on behalf of customers, and our exposure to liability for processing, operational, or technical errors in clearing functions; the impact of negative publicity on our brand and reputation; the risk that changes in business, economic, or political conditions that impact the global financial markets, or a systemic market event, might harm our business; our dependence on key employees and a skilled workforce; the difficulty of complying with an extensive, complex, and changing regulatory environment and the need to adjust our business model in response to new or modified laws and regulations; the possibility of adverse developments in pending litigation and regulatory investigations; the effects of competition; our need to innovate and acquire or invest in new products, services, technologies, and geographies in order to attract and retain customers and deepen their engagement with us in order to maintain growth; our reliance on third parties to perform some key functions and the risk that processing, operational or technological failures could impair the availability or stability of our platforms; the risk of cybersecurity incidents, theft, data breaches, and other online attacks; the difficulty of processing customer data in compliance with privacy laws; our need as a regulated financial services company to develop and maintain effective compliance and risk management infrastructures; the risks associated with incorporating artificial intelligence technologies into some of our products and processes; the volatility of cryptocurrency prices and trading volumes; the risk that our platforms and services could be exploited to facilitate illegal payments; and the risk that substantial future sales of Class A common stock in the public market, or the perception that they may occur, could cause the price of our stock to fall. Because some of these risks and uncertainties cannot be predicted or quantified and some are beyond our control, you should not rely on our forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. More information about potential risks and uncertainties that could affect our business and financial results can be found in Part II, Item 1A of our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, as well as in our other filings with the SEC, all of which are available on the SEC’s web site at www.sec.gov. Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment; new risks and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict all risks nor identify all uncertainties. The events and circumstances reflected in our forward-looking statements might not be achieved and actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Except as otherwise noted, all forward-looking statements in this press release are made as of the date of this press release, February 12, 2025, and are based on information and estimates available to us at this time. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, performance, or achievements. Except as required by law, Robinhood assumes no obligation to update any of the statements in this press release whether as a result of any new information, future events, changed circumstances, or otherwise. You should read this press release with the understanding that our actual future results, performance, events, and circumstances might be materially different from what we expect. All fourth quarter and full year 2024 financial information in this press release is preliminary, based on our estimates and subject to completion of our financial closing procedures. Final results for the full year, which will be reported in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, may vary from the information in this press release. In particular, until our financial statements are issued in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, we may be required to recognize certain subsequent events (such as in connection with contingencies or the realization of assets) which could affect our final results.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    We collect and analyze operating and financial data to evaluate the health of our business, allocate our resources and assess our performance. In addition to total net revenues, net income (loss), and other results under GAAP, we utilize non-GAAP calculations of adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (“Adjusted EBITDA”), Adjusted EBITDA Margin, Adjusted Operating Expenses, Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC, Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation, and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation. This non-GAAP financial information is presented for supplemental informational purposes only, should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for, or superior to, financial information presented in accordance with GAAP, and may be different from similarly titled non-GAAP measures used by other companies. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable financial measures calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP are provided in the financial tables included in this press release.

    Adjusted EBITDA

    Adjusted EBITDA is defined as net income (loss), excluding (i) interest expenses related to credit facilities, (ii) provision for (benefit from) income taxes, (iii) depreciation and amortization, (iv) SBC, (v) significant legal and tax settlements and reserves, and (vi) other significant gains, losses, and expenses (such as impairments, restructuring charges, and business acquisition- or disposition-related expenses) that we believe are not indicative of our ongoing results.

    The above items are excluded from our Adjusted EBITDA measure because these items are non-cash in nature, or because the amount and timing of these items are unpredictable, are not driven by core results of operations, and render comparisons with prior periods and competitors less meaningful. We believe Adjusted EBITDA provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our results of operations, as well as providing a useful measure for period-to-period comparisons of our business performance. Moreover, Adjusted EBITDA is a key measurement used by our management internally to make operating decisions, including those related to operating expenses, evaluate performance, and perform strategic planning and annual budgeting.

    Adjusted EBITDA Margin

    Adjusted EBITDA Margin is calculated as Adjusted EBITDA divided by total net revenues. The most directly comparable GAAP measure is net margin (calculated as net income (loss) divided by total net revenues). We believe Adjusted EBITDA Margin provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our results of operations, as well as providing a useful measure for period-to-period comparisons of our business performance. Adjusted EBITDA Margin is used by our management internally to make operating decisions, including those related to operating expenses, evaluate performance, and perform strategic planning and annual budgeting.

    Adjusted Operating Expenses

    Adjusted Operating Expenses is defined as GAAP total operating expenses minus (i) SBC, (ii) significant legal and tax settlements and reserves, and (iii) other significant expenses (such as impairments, restructuring charges, and business acquisition- or disposition-related expenses) that we believe are not indicative of our ongoing expenses. The amount and timing of the excluded items are unpredictable, are not driven by core results of operations, and render comparisons with prior periods less meaningful. We believe Adjusted Operating Expenses provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our results of operations, as well as providing a useful measure for period-to-period comparisons of our cost structure. Adjusted Operating Expenses is used by our management internally to make operating decisions, including those related to operating expenses, evaluate performance, and perform strategic planning and annual budgeting. Starting in Q1 2025, Adjusted Operating Expenses will no longer include provision for credit losses.

    Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC

    Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC is defined as GAAP total operating expenses minus (i) significant legal and tax settlements and reserves and (ii) other significant expenses (such as impairments, restructuring charges, and business acquisition- or disposition-related expenses), that we believe are not indicative of our ongoing expenses. The amount and timing of the excluded items are unpredictable, are not driven by core results of operations, and render comparisons with prior periods less meaningful. Unlike Adjusted Operating Expenses, Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC does not adjust for SBC. We believe Adjusted Operating Expense and SBC provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our results of operations, as well as providing a useful measure for period-to-period comparisons of our cost structure. Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC is used by our management internally to make operating decisions, including those related to operating expenses, evaluate performance, and perform strategic planning and annual budgeting.

    Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation

    Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation is defined as GAAP total operating expenses minus (i) significant legal and tax settlements and reserves, (ii) other significant expenses (such as impairments, restructuring charges, and business acquisition- or disposition-related expenses), and (iii) the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation, that we believe are not indicative of our ongoing expenses. The amount and timing of the excluded items are unpredictable, are not driven by core results of operations, and render comparisons with prior periods less meaningful. We believe Adjusted Operating Expense and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our results of operations, as well as providing a useful measure for period-to-period comparisons of our cost structure. Adjusted Operating Expenses and SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation is used by our management internally to make operating decisions, including those related to operating expenses, evaluate performance, and perform strategic planning and annual budgeting.

    SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation

    We define SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation as GAAP SBC minus the impact of the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation, which we do not believe is indicative of our ongoing expenses. The amount and timing of the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation are not driven by core results of operations and renders comparisons with prior periods less meaningful. We believe SBC excluding the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation provides useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our results of operations, as well as providing a useful measure for period-to-period comparisons of our cost structure. SBC excluding the Founders Award Cancellation is used by our management internally to make operating decisions, including those related to operating expenses, evaluate performance, and perform strategic planning and annual budgeting.

    Key Performance Metrics

    In addition to the measures presented in our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, we use the following key performance metrics to help us evaluate our business, identify trends affecting our business, formulate business plans, and make strategic decisions.

    Funded Customers

    We define a Funded Customer as a unique person who has at least one account with a Robinhood entity and, within the past 45 calendar days (a) had an account balance that was greater than zero (excluding amounts that are deposited into a Funded Customer account by the Company with no action taken by the unique person) or (b) completed a transaction using any such account. Individuals who share a funded joint investing account (which launched in July 2024) are each considered to be a Funded Customer.

    Assets Under Custody (“AUC”)

    We define AUC as the sum of the fair value of all equities, options, cryptocurrency, futures (including options on futures, swaps, and event contracts), and cash held by users in their accounts, net of receivables from users, as of a stated date or period end on a trade date basis. Net Deposits and net market gains (losses) drive the change in AUC in any given period.

    Net Deposits

    We define Net Deposits as all cash deposits and asset transfers from customers, as well as dividends, interest, and cash or assets earned in connection with Company promotions (such as account transfer and retirement match incentives and free stock bonuses) received by customers, net of reversals, customer cash withdrawals, margin interest, Gold subscription fees, and assets transferred off of our platforms for a stated period. Prior to the second quarter of 2024, Net Deposits did not include inflows from cash or assets earned in connection with Company promotions and prior to January 2024, Net Deposits did not include inflows from dividends and interest or outflows from Robinhood Gold subscription fees and margin interest, although we have not restated amounts in prior periods as the impact to those figures was immaterial.

    Average Revenue Per User (“ARPU”)

    We define ARPU as total revenue for a given period divided by the average number of Funded Customers on the last day of that period and the last day of the immediately preceding period. Figures in this press release represent ARPU annualized for each three-month period presented.

    Gold Subscribers

    We define a Gold Subscriber as a unique person who has at least one account with a Robinhood entity and who, as of the end of the relevant period (a) is subscribed to Robinhood Gold and (b) has made at least one Robinhood Gold subscription fee payment.

    Additional Operating Metrics

    Retirement AUC

    We define Retirement AUC as the total AUC in traditional IRAs and Roth IRAs.

    Cash Sweep

    We define Cash Sweep as the period-end total amount of participating users’ uninvested brokerage cash that has been automatically “swept” or moved from their brokerage accounts into deposits for their benefit at a network of program banks. This is an off-balance-sheet amount. Robinhood earns a net interest spread on Cash Sweep balances based on the interest rate offered by the banks less the interest rate given to users as stated in our program terms.

    Margin Book

    We define Margin Book as our period-end aggregate outstanding margin loan balances receivable (i.e., the period-end total amount we are owed by customers on loans made for the purchase of securities, supported by a pledge of assets in their margin-enabled brokerage accounts).

    Notional Trading Volume

    We define Notional Trading Volume or Notional Volume for any specified asset class as the aggregate dollar value (purchase price or sale price as applicable) of trades executed in that asset class over a specified period of time.

    Options Contracts Traded

    We define Options Contracts Traded as the total number of options contracts bought or sold over a specified period of time. Each contract generally entitles the holder to trade 100 shares of the underlying stock.

    Glossary Terms

    2021 Founders Award Cancellation

    We define the 2021 Founders Award Cancellation as the cancellation in February 2023 of the 2021 pre-IPO market-based restricted stock units granted to our founders of 35.5 million unvested shares.

    Investment Accounts

    We define an Investment Account as a funded individual brokerage account, a funded joint investing account, or a funded individual retirement account (“IRA”). As of December 31, 2024, a Funded Customer can have up to four Investment Accounts – individual brokerage account, joint investing account (which launched in July 2024), traditional IRA, and Roth IRA.

    Gold Adoption Rate

    We define the Gold adoption rate as end of period Gold Subscribers divided by end of period Funded Customers.

    Growth Rate and Annualized Growth Rate with respect to Net Deposits

    Growth rate is calculated as aggregate Net Deposits over a specified 12 month period, divided by AUC for the fiscal quarter that immediately precedes such 12 month period. Annualized growth rate is calculated as Net Deposits for a specified quarter multiplied by 4 and divided by AUC for the immediately preceding quarter.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Economics: African Union, African Development Bank and partners to host high-level round table ahead of global nutrition summit

    Source: African Development Bank Group

    What:      African Union High-Level Round Table – From Policy to Action: Towards a Common Position to Address Malnutrition in Africa

    Who:       The Kingdom of Lesotho, the African Union Commission (AUC), the African Development Bank’s African Leaders for Nutrition (ALN) and partners

    When:     14 February 2025; 6:00 PM – 9:00 PM EAT

    Where:    Hyatt Regency Hotel, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

    The African Union and African Leaders for Nutrition Champion, His Majesty King Letsie III of the Kingdom of Lesotho, in collaboration with the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, the African Union Commission, the African Development Bank Group, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, and Nutrition International will host a high-level side event, on 14 February 2025, on the margins of the 38th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union Commission.

    Coming just before the global Nutrition for Growth (N4G) Summit in Paris in March, the meeting will provide an opportunity for African leaders to review their progress in fighting malnutrition, share success stories, and adopt a united African position ahead of the Nutrition for Growth summit. It will also introduce a new continent-wide plan to reduce the incidence of anemia.

    Discussions will focus on strengthening accountability mechanisms and scaling up nutrition financing through innovative financing mechanisms, including how to mobilize domestic resources and leverage public-private partnerships to secure sustainable nutrition investments.

    As Africa’s population rapidly grows, investing in nutrition is not just a health priority but an economic imperative, given that the continent loses an estimated $153 billion annually due to the economic and productivity costs of malnutrition.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Commitment to Inclusive Political Transition Vital for Syria’s Success, Special Envoy Says, Warning Further Conflict Could Hinder Fight against Da’esh

    Source: United Nations MIL OSI b

    Concerns Raised over Discrimination against Women, Minorities

    Acknowledging the Syrian caretaker authorities pledges to achieve an inclusive Syrian-owned and -led political transition in line with the key principles of Council resolution 2254 (2015), the United Nations senior mediator in the country warned the Security Council today that further conflict could have a drastic impact on the fight against Da’esh and international peace and security.

    The current transition in Syria is unfolding amid territorial division in the north-east and a complex security environment in the rest of the country, said Geir O. Pedersen, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria.

    “The leadership of the caretaker authorities have repeatedly committed publicly and to me that the new Syria will be for all Syrians and built on inclusive and credible foundations,” he said.

    On 29 January, a broad range of military factions assembled in Damascus and issued a declaration dissolving the 2012 Constitution, exceptional laws, the former Parliament, the former army, former regime-allied militias and the Ba’ath Party, he said.  Ahmad al-Sharaa — declared “interim President and head of State for a transitional period” — pledged to “work to form a comprehensive transitional Government that expresses the diversity of Syria” towards “free and fair elections”.

    The Special Envoy said that, while in Syria, he was “deeply struck” by the shared conviction among Syrians that the success of the country’s political transition is essential, and that “it cannot afford to fail”.

    However, many are concerned that there has been no rule of law, no constitutional or legal framework for appointments and policy decisions and no systematic communication or transparency.  Some expressed concerns that the caretaker authorities — staffed mostly with affiliates of the Idlib Salvation Government — are taking decisions that go “beyond a caretaker mode”, including in terms of restructuring State institutions, with potential impact on specific communities.

    Additionally, many Syrians expressed concern at reports of discriminatory practices targeting women, and of increasing social pressure towards certain norms, he said, stressing that Syrian women want “more than protection”; they want meaningful participation in decision-making and transitional institutions.

    He further observed that the situation in north-east Syria complicates the political transition, pointing to daily front-line hostilities impacting civilians and civilian infrastructure.  Many Syrians expressed fears about security fragmentation and that external actors could exploit it — particularly “if the transition goes awry”.  And many expressed parallel concerns that ongoing efforts for public sector restructuring may push hundreds of thousands into need – including former security elements — potentially jeopardizing future stability.  Equally concerning is the inclusion of foreign fighters in the senior ranks of the new armed forces, as well as individuals associated with violations.

    Relatedly, he spotlighted concerning reports of incidents still taking place against the backdrop of the authorities’ security operations, including men killed in the exchange of fire and reported serious ill-treatment in detention.  In addition, residents are reportedly facing incidents of kidnapping, looting, expropriation of property and forced evictions of families from public housing.

    Against this backdrop, he called on the caretaker authorities to ensure all armed actors cease these actions, amplify their assurances into concrete procedures and work on a comprehensive transitional justice framework.  He also underscored that Israel must withdraw from Syria, noting the UN’s engagement with that country and the caretaker authorities to that end.  Further, he urged sanctioning States to ease sanctions in the critical sectors of energy, investments and finance — including the Central Bank.

    Syria ‘at Top of Priority List’ for UN, Humanitarian Aid Partners

    Joyce Msuya, Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator, highlighted the impact of continued hostilities, especially in the north of Syria, on the country’s immense humanitarian crisis. Fighting in and around Mennbij in eastern Aleppo has displaced over 25,000 people, while hostilities have continued in Ar-Raqqa and Al-Hasakeh Governorates, affecting civilian infrastructure. “Since late November [2024], the United Nations and humanitarian partners have provided more than 3.3 million people with bread assistance, as well as other food aid,” she said, highlighting the work of mobile health and nutrition teams.  The cross-border operation from Turkiye remains essential, she noted, adding that, in January, 94 trucks carrying essential supplies crossed through the Bab al-Hawa and Bab al-Salam crossings.

    “Syria remains at the top of our priority list,” she said, adding that senior representatives of humanitarian agencies have visited the country to engage with partners and caretaker authorities.  Outlining efforts to move towards a streamlined coordination architecture, which should be in place by June, she said it will be led by the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Damascus.  Turning to engagement with the caretaker authorities, she highlighted their assurances “to facilitate access, ease bureaucratic procedures and engage in practical dialogue with the humanitarian community”.  Last week, cash-withdrawal limits for aid organizations were lifted, and transactions were authorized in Syrian pounds or United States dollars.

    “Now is the time to invest in Syria’s future,” she emphasized, adding that many of the 6 million Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries are “weighing the momentous decision of whether to return”.  Alongside life-saving support, it is essential to restore critical health water and other services, she added, expressing concern about funding shortfalls and calling for “generous financial pledges”.  “The UN and partners are appealing for $1.2 billion to reach 6.7 million people through March of this year,” she said.  Further clarity is needed on the implications of the freeze on US-funded activities and associated humanitarian waivers, she said, noting that, in 2024, funding from that country accounted for more than a quarter of support for the humanitarian response plan in Syria.  She underscored that delays or suspension of funding will affect whether vulnerable people can access essential services.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Federal Reserve Board announces approval of application by WesBanco, Inc.

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    .

    February 12, 2025
    Federal Reserve Board announces approval of application by WesBanco, Inc.
    For release at 4:00 p.m. EST

    The Federal Reserve Board on Wednesday announced its approval of the application by WesBanco, Inc., of Wheeling, West Virginia, to acquire Premier Financial Corp., Defiance, and thereby indirectly acquire Premier Bank, Youngstown, both of Ohio.
    For media inquiries, please email [email protected] or call (202) 452-2955.

    Last Update: February 12, 2025

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Federal Reserve Board announces approval of proposal by ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc.

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    .

    February 12, 2025
    Federal Reserve Board announces approval of proposal by ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc.
    For release at 4:00 p.m. EST

    The Federal Reserve Board on Wednesday announced its approval of the proposal by ChoiceOne Financial Services, Inc., of Sparta, Michigan, to merge with Fentura Financial, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Fentura’s subsidiary bank, The State Bank, both of Fenton, Michigan.
    The Board also gave its approval for ChoiceOne Bank, of Sparta, Michigan, to merge with The State Bank and to establish and operate branches at The State Bank’s locations.
    For media inquiries, please email [email protected] or call (202) 452-2955.

    Last Update: February 12, 2025

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Federal Reserve Board announces approval of application by CSBH, LLC

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    .

    February 12, 2025
    Federal Reserve Board announces approval of application by CSBH, LLC
    For release at 4:00 p.m. EST

    The Federal Reserve Board on Wednesday announced its approval of the application by CSBH, LLC, of Powhatan, Virginia, to acquire up to 49.9 percent of Industry Bancshares, Inc., of Industry, Texas, and thereby indirectly acquire control of several subsidiary banks.
    Those banks include: (1) Citizens State Bank, of Buffalo, Texas; (2) Industry State Bank, of Industry, Texas; (3) Bank of Brenham, National Association, of Brenham, Texas; (4) Fayetteville Bank, of Fayetteville, Texas; (5) The First National Bank of Shiner, of Shiner Texas; and (6) The First National Bank of Bellville, of Bellville, Texas.
    For media inquiries, please email [email protected] or call (202) 452-2955.

    Last Update: February 12, 2025

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Crapo Congratulates Jonathan Gould on Nomination to Lead the OCC

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Idaho Mike Crapo

    Washington, D.C.–U.S. Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee and former Chairman of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, today applauded the nomination of Jonathan Gould to be Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).

    “Jonathan is an experienced, dedicated individual whose leadership will be essential in carrying out the OCC’s mission of ensuring safety, soundness and fair access in the financial services industry.  He will be a strong advocate for correcting the unacceptable practices that have gone against principles of fairness and market access over the last few years.  His extensive background in the public and private sectors make him highly qualified for the task ahead, and I look forward to working with him once confirmed.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Attorney’s Office Collects more than $1.5 Billion in Criminal and Civil Actions in Fiscal Year 2024

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    Criminal Payment by Crypto Exchange Binance for failing to have money laundering protections boosts collections to new record

    Seattle — U.S. Attorney Tessa M. Gorman announced today that the Western District of Washington collected $1,518145,143 in criminal and civil actions in Fiscal Year 2024. Of this amount, $1,509,282,780 was collected in criminal actions and $8,862,362 was collected in civil actions

    The Western District of Washington worked with the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section and the National Security Division  to obtain the $1.5 billion payment from cryptocurrency exchange Binance

    “Our office worked closely with Department of Justice components on the criminal case against Binance, in which Binance pleaded guilty to failing to register as a money transmitting business, willfully violating the Bank Secrecy Act and willfully causing violations of U.S. sanctions,” said U.S. Attorney Gorman. “That $1.5 billion coming through our office, is part of the $4.3 billion criminal fine and forfeiture. It is a record in the Western District of Washington.”

    Independently, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Washington collected $3.8 million in criminal restitution payments, and an additional $8.8 million civil collections. Many of the criminal collections were for cases in which people intentionally failed to pay their income taxes. The owner of a string of coffee stands paid $96,000 in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service for intentionally underreporting his income from the business. A  Snohomish County restaurant owner paid over $511,000 for tax fraud and a Tukwila restaurant owner paid $376,000 so that his $926,902 tax fraud debt was paid in full.

    Of the civil collections, the district obtained $217,000 following the sale of Dr. Frank Li’s Spokane medical office building. The payment was applied to Dr. Li’s $2.85 million civil settlement for health care fraud.

    Additionally, we collected $1.23 million from Yakima Products, Inc.  These payments (which were in addition to payments made in 2023) satisfied Yakima’s $3 million settlement with the United States, for failing to pay duties on aluminum components imported from the People’s Republic of China. Learn more about the case here: https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/automobile-accessory-company-yakima-products-inc-settles-allegations-failed-pay-duties

    The U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, along with the department’s litigating divisions, are responsible for enforcing and collecting civil and criminal debts owed to the U.S. and criminal debts owed to federal crime victims. The law requires defendants to pay restitution to victims of certain federal crimes who have suffered a physical injury or financial loss. While restitution is paid to the victim, criminal fines and felony assessments are paid to the department’s Crime Victims Fund, which distributes the funds collected to federal and state victim compensation and victim assistance programs.

    Additionally, the U.S. Attorney’s office in the Western District of Washington, working with partner agencies and divisions, collected $2,864,850 in asset forfeiture actions in FY 2024. Forfeited assets deposited into the Department of Justice Assets Forfeiture Fund are used to restore funds to crime victims and for a variety of law enforcement purposes.  A large portion of the forfeitures relate to the indictment of two men operating a business that posted stolen items for sale via online websites. You can learn more about the case here: https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/two-indicted-buying-stolen-goods-and-selling-them-online-amazon-or-ebay-more-3-million.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Economics: r* in the monetary policy universe: navigational star or dark matter? | Lecture at the London School of Economics and Political Science

    Source: Bundesbank

    Check against delivery.

    1 Introduction

    Ladies and gentlemen, It’s a pleasure and an honour for me to speak here before such a distinguished audience.

    Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. This was advice from Stephen Hawking, the famous English physicist and author of numerous books on the cosmos. And who would want to contradict the genius?

    So today I invite you to join me on a stargazing tour. If you don’t have a telescope with you, no worries. However, I should add a disclaimer here: When a couple look up at the stars, things could get romantic. When astronomers observe the stars, impressive images can come into view. When economists talk about stars, it usually gets complicated. Now you know what you’re getting into! 

    I’m sure you’ve already guessed what topic I have in mind: the natural rate of interest – also known as r-star. It is a concept that economists have been grappling with for more than 125 years.[1] And it has perhaps never received more attention than in the current era of monetary policy.

    From a central banker’s perspective, I would like to discuss what role r-star can and should play in the monetary policy universe. I will structure my lecture around four key questions: What is r-star and why is it of interest for monetary policy? How have estimates for r-star evolved over the past decades? What drives uncertainty about current estimates and the future evolution of r-star? What conclusions should monetary policy draw from this?

    2 Definition of r-star and use for monetary policy

    Let’s start with the definition. The natural rate is the real interest rate that would prevail if the economy were operating at its potential and prices were stable. R-star is commonly thought to be driven by real forces that structurally affect the balance between saving and investment. Think of technological progress and demographics, for example. This also means that r-star should, by definition, be independent of monetary policy. The latter follows from the widely held belief that monetary policy can affect real variables only temporarily, but is neutral in the long term.

    At first glance, the natural rate could be a guiding star for the conduct of monetary policy. If a central bank sets its policy rates so that the real interest rate is above r-star, monetary policy is restrictive or “tight”. Consequently, economic activity slows and the inflation rate should decrease. If the real rate is below r-star, monetary policy is expansionary or “loose”. It provides incentives for consumers to purchase more and for enterprises to step up investment and output. Hence, this should result in more economic activity and a higher inflation rate.

    However, the idea of the natural rate serving as a guiding star for monetary policy comes with profound challenges. Perhaps the name r-star evokes associations with astronomy and navigation. But these would be misleading. If r-star were like a star in the sky, it would be relatively easy to locate. Stars emit light and are therefore observable.

    The natural rate is a theoretical concept. It is based on a hypothetical state of the world. That means the natural rate is, by nature, unobservable. It can only be estimated. For example, models use assumptions about the relationship between measurable variables and r-star. In this respect, the natural rate is not so much like a star shining brightly in the sky. It is more a case of dark matter. As it is invisible, astronomers infer dark matter indirectly by observing its gravitational effects.

    If something is hard to find, it only spurs researchers to look even harder – whether they are astronomers or economists. Therefore, we can draw on a variety of estimation methods for the evolution of the natural rate.

    3 Estimates for r-star over time

    Since around the 1980s various estimates of different types have been pointing to a downward trend for r-star over several decades and across many advanced economies.[2] In the wake of the global financial crisis, the estimates slumped to exceptionally low levels.[3] This development was roughly in line with the observed trajectory of actual real interest rates of short- and long-term government bonds during this period. And no wonder: In the long run, both should be driven by the same fundamental forces affecting the balance between saving and investment.

    So the question is this: what has lifted saving and depressed investment? A simple answer would be: in the long term, the most important driver is potential growth. But this finding is not very enlightening. Potential growth is also not observable. It is determined by underlying forces such as demographics and technological progress. This is where we need to look for the causes.

    Indeed, according to a number of recent studies, waning productivity growth and population ageing were the key factors in pushing saving up and investment down.[4] Lower productivity reduces the return on investment, so people are less willing to invest. As they expect to live longer, they are more willing to save.

    In addition, inequality, risk aversion and fiscal policy could be other factors. For example, growing inequality raises saving, as richer households save a larger share of their income. Similarly, higher risk aversion leads to higher saving, especially in safe assets, while lowering investment.[5] 

    Many of the estimates for r-star reached their lowest point in the pandemic years 2020 and 2021. After that, there were signs of a partial reversal. A recent analysis by Eurosystem economists across a suite of models and data up to the end of 2024 suggests that estimates of r-star range from − ½ % to ½ % in real terms. In nominal terms, they find that it ranges between 1¾ % and 2¼ %.[6]

    It is clear that these ranges depend on the estimating approaches considered. Taking into account an even wider array of measures, Bundesbank staff calculations using data up to the end of 2024 reveal a range of 1.8 % to 2.5 %.[7] And the ECB found for the third quarter of 2024: When three estimates derived from versions of the Holston-Laubach-Williams model are factored in, the range of real r-star is − ½ % to 1 % and the nominal range is 1¾ % to 3 %.

    All in all, the results suggest that the range of r-star estimates most likely increased by about one percentage point from their lows. The latest estimates by economists from the Bank for International Settlements come to similar findings.[8]

    The reasons for the increase after the pandemic are not yet fully clear. For example, high fiscal spending with rising public debt levels could play a role. Or higher needs for capital, as companies make their value chains more resilient by duplicating structures and increasing stock levels.

    4 Uncertainties around r-star estimates

    Stargazing tours in economics are a journey into the uncertain. This is also and especially true for r-star. Estimates of the natural rate of interest are subject to major uncertainties, shaped by three M’s: megatrends, methodology and monetary policy.

    First, we are facing a number of megatrends. Think of climate change, ageing societies, digitalisation, and the risks of de-globalisation and increasing geopolitical divisions. The effects of these megatrends on natural rates are difficult to gauge and may change over time.

    On the one hand, they could contribute to a higher natural rate. Here are some examples: The widespread uptake of artificial intelligence could boost productivity growth. The green transition could lead to higher investment. Fiscal deficits could persist at an elevated level due to higher defence spending given geopolitical tensions. The entry of the baby boomer generation into retirement could reduce savings.

    On the other hand, life expectancy is predicted to keep rising; the high hopes for the productivity-enhancing effect of AI could turn out to be too optimistic; and given high public debt levels, fiscal space for additional spending is limited in many countries. Overall, it is virtually impossible to predict which developments will prevail in affecting r-star.

    The second factor of uncertainty is methodology. The methods used to define and estimate r-star differ in important ways, especially in terms of time and risk. 

    Ricardo Reis demonstrates this impressively in a recent paper.[9] He presents four different “r-stars”. They are based on four different conceptual approaches. And they developed quite differently between 1995 and 2019. 

    One major difference is the risk dimension. Knut Wicksell’s original definition of the natural rate was the rate of return on physical capital in equilibrium.[10] The rate of return on physical capital is the return on investment in the real economy. And this rate is very much associated with risks. 

    However, this perspective has been lost in virtually all of the model approaches. Generally, they use rather secure government bond yields as a starting point. Again, with regard to the real economy, a risky return on capital would be a more appropriate yardstick. When we look at measures for the return on private capital, we see a strong contrast with risk-free rates. Returns on private capital have remained broadly stable over the last decades in the US,[11] Germany[12] and the euro area as a whole.[13] 

    From these observations, Ricardo Reis draws the following conclusion: focusing exclusively on the return on government bonds as the measure of r-star, while neglecting the return on private capital, leads to the wrong policy advice.[14]

    Another case in point is the time horizon that is considered. Commonly cited estimates seek to assess the real rate that prevails in the longer run, when all shocks have dissipated. Most of these estimates are highly imprecise. Many methods simply project the current or the historical level of real rates into the future. This may confound permanent trends with cyclical factors, which may not be representative for the future. As a result, such methods could miss important turning points in real rate trends. 

    Other approaches characterise a short-run real rate in a hypothetical world without frictions. While interesting, this concept is of limited value for actual policymaking in the real world. Methods based on a short-term equilibrium tend to produce more volatile estimates of r-star.

    There is a third reason for caution: monetary policy itself may play a role in shaping the natural rate or its estimates. A number of studies challenge the view that money is neutral in the long run.[15] 

    There are different channels through which monetary policy could have lasting effects on real interest rates. Prolonged tight monetary policy, for example, may lower investment, innovation and productivity growth.[16] By contrast, persistent monetary easing could fuel financial imbalances and contribute to zombification.[17] 

    Moreover, recent research suggests that central bank announcements provide guidance about the trend in real rates. For instance, a narrow window around Fed meetings captures most of the trend decline in US real long-term yields since 1980.[18] This could mean: when central banks look for r-star in financial market prices, they might actually be looking in a mirror.[19] Feedback loops between monetary policy and markets could unduly reinforce their perceptions about r-star. And shifts in perceived r-star could affect actual r-star as it influences saving and investment decisions.

    5 Conclusions for monetary policy

    Against the backdrop of these major uncertainties, the final key question of my speech is this: what role can and should r-star play for monetary policy in practice?

    Let’s approach the answer with a thought experiment: Put yourself in the shoes of a monetary policymaker who only looks at r-star. The relevant interest rate with which you steer the monetary policy stance is currently 2.75 %. After a previous series of interest rate cuts, you consider whether a further cut would be appropriate.

    Your staff inform you that various point estimates of r-star range from around 1.8 % to 2.5 % in nominal terms. If r-star were at the upper end of the estimates, the policy rate would become neutral with the next rate cut. Things would be different if r-star were at the lower end of the estimates: Monetary policy would continue to be restrictive, even after several further rate cuts.

    So how would you proceed, given a certain stance you want to achieve? Beware: If you rely on a wrong estimate, your decision may have a different effect on inflation than you intended. Simply choosing the middle of the range might not be a happy medium. Around the point estimates, there are often uncertainty bands of different sizes and with asymmetries.

    As you have probably guessed: It is no coincidence that I have described this particular decision-making situation. It looks similar in the euro area ahead of the next monetary policy meeting of the ECB Governing Council at the beginning of March. After several rate cuts, the neutral rate could already be near – or there may still be some way to go.

    The President of the New York Fed, John Williams, put the problem in a nutshell when he said: as we have gotten closer to the range of estimates of neutral, what appeared to be a bright point of light is really a fuzzy blur.[20]

    The bottom line here is this: The closer we get to the neutral rate, the more appropriate it becomes to take a gradual approach. For this purpose, r-star is a helpful concept: it indicates when we need to be more cautious with policy rate moves so that we don’t take a wrong step. 

    At the same time, the limits of the concept are also clear: it would be risky to base decisions mainly on r-star estimates. Much more is needed to assess the current monetary policy stance and the optimal policy path for the near future.

    That is why the Eurosystem uses a variety of financial, real economic and other indicators along the monetary policy transmission mechanism. We want the fullest picture possible. And, of course, r-star also has a place in this picture. For instance, r-star is included in model-based optimal policy projections that we use in the decision-making process.

    In my opinion, proceeding in a data-driven and gradual manner has served the ECB Governing Council well. There is no reason to act hastily in the present uncertain environment. The data will tell us where we need to go.

    Away from day-to-day monetary policymaking, the concept of the natural rate of interest provides a useful framework. This is also exemplified in the policy scenarios that Ricardo Reis presented last week in Brussels.[21]

    He works with the assumption that government bond rates remain around current levels. I would add the assumption that inflation stays on target – actually, that is what I am in office for and committed to. Assuming output is at capacity, policy rates would be persistently higher than in the past. But the recommendations on actual monetary policy depend on the driving forces: is the new setting caused by less demand for safe and liquid assets or by an increase in productivity? And he has two more scenarios in his paper!

    That provides a good example of why we should take a close look at the factors behind r-star estimates. Here it is important to even better understand the forces that are shifting real interest rate trends. We need to find out how these forces and trends affect our work to ensure price stability.

    Reviewing our monetary policy strategy from time to time is therefore vital. That is precisely what we are doing right now in the Eurosystem. And, of course, in this process, we look at all the questions I mentioned about r-star.

    Our stargazing tour is drawing to a close. It turns out we were dealing more with dark matter than with a shining star. Just as dark matter is an exciting field for astronomers, r-star is a rewarding topic for economists.

    Using r-star alone to navigate the monetary policy universe could be like flying almost blind. But having it as one of many instruments in your cockpit is highly useful.

    I would like to end by quoting Stephen Hawking again: Mankind’s greatest achievements have come about by talking, and its greatest failures by not talking.

    Footnotes: 

    1. Wicksell, K. (1898), Geldzins und Güterpreise: eine Studie über die den Tauschwert des Geldes bestimmenden Ursachen, Jena, G. Fischer (English version as ibid. (1936), Interest and prices: a study of the causes regulating the value of money, London, Macmillan).
    2. Obstfeld, M., Natural and Neutral Real Interest Rates: Past and Future, NBER Working Paper, No 31949, December 2023.
    3. Brand, C., M. Bielecki and A. Penalver (2018), The natural rate of interest: estimates, drivers, and challenges to monetary policy, ECB Occasional Paper, No 217.
    4. Cesa-Bianchi, A., R. Harrison and R. Sajedi (2023), Global R*, CEPR Discussion Paper No 18518; Davis, J., C. Fuenzalida, L. Huetsch, B. Mills and A. M. Taylor (2024), Global natural rates in the long run: Postwar macro trends and the market-implied r* in 10 advanced economies, Journal of International Economics, Vol. 149; International Monetary Fund (2023), The natural rate of interest: drivers and implications for policy, World Economic Outlook, April, Chapter 2.
    5. On the development of risk appetite in financial markets, see Deutsche Bundesbank, Risk appetite in financial markets and monetary policy, Monthly Report, January 2025.
    6. Brand, C., N. Lisack and F. Mazelis (2025), Natural rate estimates for the euro area: insights, uncertainties and shortcomings, ECB Economic Bulletin, 1/2025.
    7. Additional models would also provide values outside this range, but are currently not deemed sufficiently robust.
    8. Benigno, G., B. Hofmann, G. Nuño and D. Sandri (2024), Quo vadis, r*? The natural rate of interest after the pandemic, BIS Quarterly Review, March.
    9. Reis, R. (2025), The Four R-stars: From Interest Rates to Inflation and Back, draft working paper. 
    10. Wicksell, K. (1898), op. cit.
    11. Caballero, R., E. Farhi and P.-O. Gourinchas (2017), Rents, Technical Change, and Risk Premia Accounting for Secular Trends in Interest Rates, Returns on Capital, Earning Yields, and Factor Shares, American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings 107(5), pp. 614‑620.
    12. Deutsche Bundesbank, The natural rate of interest, Monthly Report, October 2017.
    13. Brand, C., M. Bielecki and A. Penalver (2018), The natural rate of interest: estimates, drivers, and challenges to monetary policy, ECB Occasional Paper, No 217.
    14. Reis, R., Which r-star, public bonds or private investment? Measurement and policy implications, Unpublished manuscript, September 2022.
    15. Jordà, Ò., S. Singh and A. Taylor, The long-run effects of monetary policy, NBER Working Papers, No 26666, January 2020, revised September 2024; Benigno, G., B. Hofmann, G. Nuño and D. Sandri (2024), Quo vadis, r*? The natural rate of interest after the pandemic, BIS Quarterly Review, March.
    16. Baqaee, D., E. Farhi and K. Sangani, The supply-side effects of monetary policy, NBER Working Paper, No 28345, January 2021, revised March 2023; Ma, Y. and K. Zimmermann, Monetary Policy and Innovation, NBER Working Paper, No 31698, September 2023.
    17. Borio, C., P. Disyatat, M. Juselius and P. Rungcharoenkitkul (2022), Why so low for so long? A long-term view of real interest rates, International Journal of Central Banking, Vol. 18, No 3.
    18. Hillenbrand, S. (2025), The Fed and the Secular Decline in Interest Rates, The Review of Financial Studies, forthcoming. 
    19. Williams, J. C. (2017), Comment on “Safety, Liquidity, and the Natural Rate of Interest”, by M. Del Negro, M. P. Giannoni, D. Giannone, and A. Tambalotti, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 1, pp. 235‑316; Rungcharoenkitkul, P. and F. Winkler, The natural rate of interest through a hall of mirrors, BIS Working Paper No 974, November 2021.
    20. Williams, J. C., Remarks at the 42nd Annual Central Banking Seminar, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York City, 1 October 2018.
    21. Reis, R. (2025), op. cit.

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Latest news – Meeting on current political situation in Gaza and West Bank- 12/02/2025 – Delegation for relations with Palestine

    Source: European Parliament

    The meeting of the Delegation for relations with Palestine took place on Wednesday, 12 February from 15.00 to 16.30, in Strasbourg, room CHURCHILL 200.

    The main subject of discussion will be an exchange of views on the current political situation in Gaza and the West Bank with Mr Michael Mann, Head of Division, Middle East – Israel, Occupied Palestinian Territories and Middle East Peace Process – EEAS.

    The meeting was web-streamed and can be accessed via the European Parliament’s Multimedia Centre.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: European Union to support the development of a new multipurpose seaport on Kiritimati Island

    Source: European Investment Bank

    • EIB Global, with €2.5 million (AUD 4.1 million) in EU-backed technical assistance, will oversee the feasibility study to assess the construction of a multipurpose seaport and wave breaker.
    • The study will evaluate the project’s technical, environmental and social viability for implementation on Kiritimati (Christmas) Island, Kiribati.
    • This initiative is a key part of the EU’s Global Gateway strategy, enhancing infrastructure and connectivity in the Pacific region.
    • Upon completion, EIB Global, alongside development partners, will consider the project for potential financing.

    The European Investment Bank (EIB Global) and the Delegation of the European Union to the Pacific have signed a €2.5 million (AUD 4.1 million) contribution agreement to provide technical assistance for a feasibility assessment of the construction and operation of a multipurpose seaport and wave breaker on Kiritimati (Christmas) Island, Kiribati, in the Pacific Ocean.

    Managed by EIB Global, this EU-funded technical assistance will finance feasibility, environmental and social studies to assess the port’s viability and potential impact, while identifying solutions to enhance maritime infrastructure to support fishing vessel transshipment, commercial container shipping, and tourism. The initiative aims to strengthen trade connectivity, drive sustainable economic growth and improve climate resilience in the region.

    This initiative aligns with the European Union’s Global Gateway strategy, which aims to enhance connectivity between Europe and key global regions. The new port will strengthen Kiribati’s role as a strategic trade hub and support the development of essential logistics and transportation infrastructure, driving economic growth and regional integration.

    EIB Vice-President Ambroise Fayolle, who is in charge of EIB operations in the Pacific, said: “The European Investment Bank is proud to support Kiribati in exploring the potential of a new multipurpose seaport on Kiritimati Island. This project reflects our strong commitment to combating climate change and enhancing sustainable infrastructure and connectivity in the Pacific region under the European Union’s Global Gateway strategy. By assessing the technical, environmental and social feasibility of the port, we aim to lay the groundwork for improved trade opportunities, economic growth and climate resilience. We look forward to working closely with our partners to bring this initiative to fruition.”

    The Ambassador of the European Union to the Pacific, Her Excellency Barbara Plinkert said: “The European Union is committed to fostering sustainable development and regional connectivity, and the Kiritimati Island seaport project is a significant step towards achieving these goals. Through the European Union’s Global Gateway initiative, we support infrastructure that strengthens trade and enhances climate resilience in the Pacific. This feasibility study, supported by EIB Global, exemplifies our collaborative approach with partners to support the advancement of the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent and build a more interconnected, resilient and prosperous Pacific region.”

    Background information:

    The European Investment Bank (ElB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union, owned by its Member States. It finances investments that contribute to EU policy objectives.

    EIB Global is the EIB Group’s specialised arm devoted to increasing the impact of international partnerships and development finance, and a key partner in Global Gateway. We aim to support €100 billion of investment by the end of 2027, around one third of the overall target of this EU initiative. With Team Europe, EIB Global fosters strong, focused partnerships, alongside fellow development finance institutions and civil society. EIB Global brings the EIB Group closer to people, companies and institutions through our offices around the world.

    Global Gateway is the European Union’s strategy to reduce the worldwide investment gap, boost smart, clean and secure connections in the digital, energy and transport sectors, and strengthen health, education and research systems. The Global Gateway strategy embodies a Team Europe approach that brings together the European Union, EU Member States and European development finance institutions. It aims to mobilise up to €300 billion in public and private investments between 2021 and 2027, creating essential links rather than dependencies, and closing the global investment gap.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – SEDE exchanges with EIB Vice-President de Groot & with NATO PA President Perestrello – Committee on Security and Defence

    Source: European Parliament

    SEDE_soldier_EU_defence.png © Adobe Stock

    On 18 February, the Committee on Security and Defence (SEDE) will hold an exchange of views with Robert DE GROOT, Vice-President of the European Investment Bank (EIB), on the Bank’s role in strengthening European defence. This discussion is particularly timely after the recent informal European Council retreat discussions on the need to enhance the financing of European Defence. …

    SEDE Members will also have an exchange of views with Marcos PERESTRELLO, President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA). This item will be held jointly with the Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (DNAT).

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Loans of repatriated ethnic Greeks from former USSR countries – E-000486/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000486/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI)

    The Pan-Pontian Federation of Greece expresses the anguish of thousands of families repatriated from former USSR countries, who are facing the threat of their homes being auctioned or seized for loans they had taken out using a rehabilitation programme under the Law of 2000. After the onset the economic crisis in 2009, many families found themselves unable to make their loan repayments.

    The large increases in repayment instalments and interest are due to the fact that the loans were linked to Greek State bonds, the prices of which sky-rocketed during the period of the memoranda signed by the Greek governments of ND, SYRIZA and PASOK with the EU, the European Central Bank and the IMF. The funding for the repatriation programme was provided by the Public Investment Programme, which also included funds from the Third and Fourth Community Support Frameworks.

    Given the EU’s shared responsibility for leading thousands of families of repatriated people down a dead end,

    • 1.What is the Commission’s position on the urgent request to write off the amounts that have amassed from increases, recapitalisations and compound interest?
    • 2.What is the Commission’s position on the urgent request for the annual service cost, after the above write-offs, not to exceed 10% of the annual taxable amount, in order for such people to be able to save their only home, which for them was a lifelong dream?
    • 3.What is the Commission’s position on the urgent request to cease any enforcement actions or other coercive measure on the part of credit institutions and the State, so that they do not lose their homes?

    Submitted: 4.2.2025

    Last updated: 12 February 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Multiple red flags’: ASIC’s court case against Star executives shows the risks of complacency

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Sheedy, Professor – Risk governance, culture, remuneration, Macquarie University

    This week the corporate regulator is taking on executives and directors of Star Entertainment in the Federal Court, in a landmark case for Australian corporate governance.

    ASIC will allege that despite multiple red flags that should have prompted internal investigation, directors at Star sat on their hands while accepting the considerable perks of the office.

    Historically, ASIC has not been willing to go after apparently lax directors and executives and there are questions about its effectiveness as a regulator. Will this time be different?

    What is Star accused of?

    The case against Star Entertainment, like so many others, boils down to “acting with reasonable care and diligence” in respect of risk management. Did Star’s board and executives sufficiently focus on the well-known risks of money-laundering and criminal association in the operation of its casinos in Sydney and Queensland?

    ASIC will seek to show that they did not. It is suing several former directors and executives, including the former chief executive, in a case expected to last six weeks. The defendants deny they breached their duties.

    Warnings were ‘ignored’

    In the first days of hearings, ASIC told the court the board had been given evidence of money-laundering risks from high-rollers with ties to criminal organisations, but that those warnings were ignored.

    The court was told the board and executives were “incurious and complacent” about alleged criminal activity and money-laundering, with wads of cash delivered in a blue Esky and in paper bags to a private gambling room.

    If the allegations are proven, it won’t be just the shareholders who have suffered. Anti-money-laundering laws exist because criminals need to clean their ill-gotten gains, or make them appear legitimate. While not alleged in this instance, in general, money-laundering enables crimes such as scams, fraud, child exploitation and drug/sex trafficking. There are many victims throughout society.

    The issues at Star were uncovered by journalists in 2021. This was the catalyst for the NSW Independent Casino Commission to set up a review by Adam Bell SC. On August 31 2022, Bell handed down his findings into The Star casino’s suitability to hold a casino licence in NSW in a 946-page report.

    Two months later, the NSW commission announced it had suspended Star’s licence indefinitely, fined the casino $100 million, and appointed an independent manager.

    Share price tanked

    Since 2021, the share price for Star Entertainment Group has collapsed from $3.76 to 13 cents today, wiping billions in market value.

    It is true that Star Entertainment has been hurt by factors other than the financial allegations identified by Bell. But the collapse in revenue suggests the casino operator’s business model was inherently reliant on money-laundering. Strip that out, and what remains is a business that will likely not survive without a white knight.

    To what extent can the directors be blamed for these failures? Based on the defences used during the Bell inquiry, they may claim they were not involved in the complex, day-to-day management of operations. Executives failed to inform them of risk-management issues. But are these adequate excuses?

    According to the Australian Institute of Company Directors, of which the Star Entertainment directors were all alumni, directors must “apply an enquiring mind […] test information put before them by management and proactively consider what other information they require”. Bear in mind the handsome remuneration received by the directors to perform their oversight duties. The former chairman, John O’Neill, received a total of $484,500 in financial year 2021.

    For this sort of money, shareholders might reasonably expect some tough questions would be asked, especially given the red flags that came to light. The internal audit team or external independent advisers could have been charged with further investigating issues of concern.

    Putting directors on notice

    Unfortunately, the scandal at Star Entertainment is not an isolated case of risk-governance failure. A royal commission found the directors of Crown Casino also failed properly to manage the risks of money-laundering.

    The financial crime regulator, Austrac, has identified similar failures at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Westpac and Adelaide’s Sky City casino. Turning to cyber risk, it is clear that firms such as Medibank and Latitude Financial have failed to protect sensitive customer data.

    While most of the above listed companies have been fined by regulators, the consequences for individual directors have been limited or non-existent. And herein lies the problem – lack of accountability breeds inattention, indolence and recklessness.

    Where is the incentive for directors to ask those tough questions of the executive, to rock the boat on a nice cosy board? The reputation of ASIC as an ineffective corporate regulator has not served either shareholders or the Australian public well.

    That is why the outcome of this case is so important. A win would put directors on notice that risk governance is a serious matter and they need to do more to earn their substantial fees.

    Elizabeth Sheedy is on the advisory board of the Financial Integrity Hub and was previously on the board of the Australian Compliance Institute. In the past she has received research funding from financial institutions that have been accused of money-laundering, and from the Australian Compliance Institute.

    ref. ‘Multiple red flags’: ASIC’s court case against Star executives shows the risks of complacency – https://theconversation.com/multiple-red-flags-asics-court-case-against-star-executives-shows-the-risks-of-complacency-249599

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: 13 children killed in the West Bank since year began: UNICEF

    Source: United Nations 2

    Humanitarian Aid

    The UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) has voiced deep alarm at the growing number of children killed, injured and displaced in the occupied West Bank, as violence continues to escalate. 

    In a statement issued by Edouard Beigbeder, UNICEF’s Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa, the agency called for “the immediate cessation of armed activity across the occupied West Bank”.

    A 10-year-old Palestinian boy died from gunshot wounds last Friday and two days later, a woman who was eight months pregnant was reportedly shot and killed in Nur Shams camp, resulting in the loss of her unborn baby.

    The violence, which has intensified in recent weeks, has left families in mourning and communities in distress.

    Sharp increase in child fatalities

    According to UNICEF, 13 Palestinian children have been killed in the West Bank since the beginning of 2025.

    Seven of these deaths occurred after 19 January, following a large-scale military operation in the north of the territory. Among the casualties was a two-year-old whose pregnant mother was also injured in the shooting.

    The numbers reflect a worrying trend. Since 7 October 2023, 195 Palestinian children and three Israeli children have been killed in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

    “There has been a 200 per cent increase in the number of Palestinian children killed in the territory over the past 16 months as compared to the 16 months prior,” Mr. Beigbeder explained.

    Devastation in refugee camps

    The humanitarian situation has worsened in areas such as Jenin, Tulkarem and Tubas Governorates, where airstrikes, demolitions and the use of explosive weapons have severely damaged essential infrastructure.

    Many communities, particularly in refugee camps, have been cut off from basic services, with water and electricity supplies disrupted.

    Thousands of families have been displaced due to military operations, including in Jenin, Nur Shams, Tulkarem and al-Faraa Camps.

    The deteriorating security situation has made daily life increasingly difficult, particularly for children.

    Education under threat

    The education of children has been severely disrupted, with nearly 100 schools affected.

    Teachers and students in conflict-hit areas face significant risks in attending classes, heightening concerns over long-term psychological and social impacts.

    Many children require urgent mental health and psychosocial support due to their exposure to violence, displacement and the loss of loved ones.

    UNICEF has called for greater resources to address these growing needs.

    Call for protection

    “UNICEF condemns all acts of violence against children,” said Mr. Beigbeder. “All civilians, including every child without exception, must be protected.

    “Humanitarian organizations must have safe and unfettered access to deliver life-saving assistance and protection services to children and their families,” he continued.

    UNICEF emphasised the urgent need for a lasting political solution, backed by the international community, to secure a peaceful and stable future for all children in the region.

    The agency “stands ready to work with partners to address both the immediate and long-term needs of affected children and families in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem,” Mr. Beigbeder concluded.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Nigeria to Host 32nd Afreximbank Annual Meetings from 23 to 28 June 2025

    Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:

    ABUJA, Nigeria, February 12, 2025/APO Group/ —

    The Federal Government of Nigeria and Afreximbank (www.Afreximbank.com) have signed the Host Country Agreement for the 32nd Afreximbank Annual Meetings (AAM) in Abuja, Nigeria, from 23-28 June 2025.

    Afreximbank Annual Meetings is one of the most anticipated gatherings on the African continent, featuring high-level policy discussions, presentations, and side events on issues pertinent to the socio-economic development of Africa as well as business networking sessions that drive integration through trade and investments.

    The 32nd Afreximbank Annual Meetings in June 2025 is expected to be the largest gathering of Global Africa in the Bank’s Annual Meetings history, bringing together over 6,000 delegates including Heads of State, government officials, captains of industry, businesspeople, decision-makers, academics, respected experts and advisors from Africa, the CARICOM region and globally.

    Commenting on the significance of the agreement, H.E. Wale Edun, the Honourable Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy for Nigeria, emphasised Nigeria’s strong partnership with Afreximbank and its commitment to fostering trade and economic growth for Africa and beyond.

    He said: “Nigeria is honoured to host the 2025 Afreximbank Annual Meetings, which will serve as a critical platform to drive discussions on trade financing, economic growth, and investment opportunities across Africa.” He added: “This event is a testament to our commitment to strengthening Africa’s financial sector and positioning Nigeria as a hub for economic transformation.”

    Professor Benedict Oramah, President and Chairman of the Board of Directors, Afreximbank, said: “We greatly appreciate the Federal Government of Nigeria’s acceptance to host the 2025 Afreximbank Annual Meetings, which demonstrates our united determination to accelerating Africa’s economic growth and development.

    “The Government of Nigeria has been a steadfast partner and a strong backbone of the Bank. It has consistently responded positively to capital calls, injecting significant equity into the Bank even when the economic environment seemed challenging; removing regulatory hurdles that would otherwise inhibit the Bank’s business in Nigeria, and being at the forefront of rallying continental support for the Bank.”

     “This year’s theme, ‘Building the Future on Decades of Resilience,’ reflects the progress that we have made over the past three decades and the bold steps that are imperative to navigate the increasingly complex global landscape. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCTA) has given our continent an unrivalled opportunity to deliver sustainable economic transformation that will propel Africa’s economic growth and raise living standards and prosperity for all Africans.

    “Afreximbank Annual Meetings will provide a platform to reflect on our journey, celebrate contributions, and chart a path forward that reinforces our continent’s economic independence and global influence. We look forward to welcoming and meeting stakeholders from across Africa and other parts of the world to Abuja for this prestigious event.”

    Prof. Oramah noted that Nigeria’s unwavering support to Afreximbank has been the primary driver of the Bank’s strong continental impact. “The impact on the Nigerian economy is equally palpable. Being the largest recipient of the Bank’s trade and development finance, Nigeria has attracted cumulative disbursements of about US$52 billion in addition to being the first beneficiary of several flagship transformative projects being executed by the Bank such as the African Medical Centre of Excellence (AMCE), African Quality Assurance Centre (AQAC), Afreximbank African Trade Centre (AATC), among others.

    This year’s event comes on the backdrop of the highly successful 2024 AAM, held in Nassau, The Bahamas and attended by over 4,000 delegates, including over 20 Heads of State, government ministers, high-level dignitaries, global experts, and world-renowned celebrities and artists.

    Afreximbank was established when the shareholders held their first General Meeting in Abuja, Nigeria in October 1993. Today, Nigeria is Afreximbank’s second-largest shareholder.

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Security: Thirty-Eight Defendants Sentenced in Massive Prison-Based Drug Trafficking Ring

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    ATLANTA, Ga. – Thirty-eight members of a drug trafficking organization, including several State of Georgia prison inmates, have been sentenced for their roles in coordinating and distributing deadly heroin, methamphetamine, and fentanyl throughout the metro-Atlanta area, as well as laundering drug proceeds to Mexico.

    “The successful dismantling of this large organization is a result of a tenacious multi-year effort from federal, state, and local authorities to root out narcotics trafficking originating from state prisons,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Richard S. Moultrie, Jr.  “Our office will continue to work closely with our law enforcement partners to leverage all resources to identify, apprehend, and prosecute entire networks of offenders responsible for distributing deadly drugs into our communities.” 

    “These sentences mirror the destructive impact on the community caused by this violent drug trafficking organization,” said Jae W. Chung, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the DEA Atlanta Division. “Wherever you operate, if you distribute dangerous drugs, DEA will find you and hold you accountable.”

    “Thanks to the hard work and collaboration of our local, state, and federal law enforcement partners, thirty-eight members of this extensive drug distribution network will spend significant time behind bars where they will no longer be able to plague our community with poison,” said Sean Burke, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. 

    According to Acting U.S. Attorney Moultrie, the charges and other information presented in court: During the investigation, federal special agents learned that a network of prison inmates was using contraband cell phones to broker drug transactions throughout the metro-Atlanta area, including importing drug shipments from Mexico and other states. These prison brokers relied on conspirators on the outside to store, package and distribute multiple types of illegal drugs. Other members of the organization were responsible for laundering the proceeds from the drug sales to Mexico using local money remitters.  The organization also repeatedly threatened violence to uncooperative members.  In one case, agents learned of a plot to abduct and murder a narcotics dealer.  In response, law enforcement quickly mobilized to disrupt the plan.

    After the first phase of the investigation concluded, a Grand Jury sitting in the Northern District of Georgia returned an indictment against 19 of the conspirators for drug trafficking and money laundering offenses.  During the second phase of the investigation, agents identified additional conspirators including two of the high-level prison brokers, Jesus Sanchez-Morales and Juan Ramirez, who were later indicted by the Grand Jury for drug trafficking offenses.  After Ramirez was brought into federal custody, he used another contraband cell phone to broker drug deals, including the attempted distribution of fentanyl.  The Grand Jury later charged him with this new conduct.  

    Through this multi-year investigation, agents seized over 250 kilograms of methamphetamine, 25 gallons of liquid methamphetamine, more than 12,000 fentanyl pills, kilogram-quantities of fentanyl powder, heroin, and marijuana, and over $450,000 in drug proceeds. 

    The defendants were convicted and sentenced by U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May:

    • Juan Ramirez was sentenced earlier today to 27 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release .  Ramirez was convicted of ten drug trafficking counts including Conspiracy and Possession with the Intent to Distribute  Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl, after a jury found him guilty of these charges on July 25, 2024.
    • Jesus Sanchez-Morales was sentenced to 27 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Sanchez-Morales was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on June 22, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Martin Maldonado was sentenced to 19 years, seven months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Maldonado was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on April 26, 2021, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Benjamin Villareal Perez was sentenced to 19 years, seven months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Perez was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on September 17, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Jaime Chavez was sentenced to 17 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Chavez was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl and Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime on April 30, 2021, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Aszavious Anderson was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Anderson was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl and Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime on May 28, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Kristofer Ty Armistead was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Armistead was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on June 7, 2021, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Mario Castillo was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Castillo was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine and Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime on September 25, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Aricus Cantrell Holloway was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Holloway was convicted of Conspiracy and Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on April 24, 2023, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Cristian Hernandez-Lovo was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Hernandez-Lovo was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl and Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime on September 24, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Jesus Antonio Molina-Ortiz was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Molina-Ortiz was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl and Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime on August 10, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Jamar Tyrone Zanders was sentenced to 15 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Zanders was convicted of Conspiracy and Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on September 24, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Brandon Richard Duncan was sentenced to 14 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Duncan was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on July 9, 2021, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Joseph Dominic Edwards was sentenced to 14 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Edwards was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on August 4, 2023, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Rafael Alvarez was sentenced to 13 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Alvarez was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on August 13, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Jason Garcia-Lara was sentenced to 13 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Garcia-Lara was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on June 23, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Jordan Duane Bowers was sentenced to 12 years, six months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Bowers was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Fentanyl, and Heroin on May 10, 2022, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Emmanuel De Santos Nieto was sentenced to 12 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. De Santos Nieto was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on September 9, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Salvador Valencia-Zavala was sentenced to 11 years, three months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Valencia-Zavala was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on January 27, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Marvin Gaye Banks was sentenced to 11 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Banks was convicted of Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on July 15, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Samantha Fagundes was sentenced to 11 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Fagundes was convicted of Conspiracy and Possession with the Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl, on January 15, 2020, after she pleaded guilty.
    • Alejandro Vasquez-Lopez was sentenced to 10 years, nine months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Vasquez-Lopez was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on May 24, 2021, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Shelly Denise Class was sentenced to 10 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Class was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on October 10, 2019, after she pleaded guilty.
    • Edgar Ochoa Martinez was sentenced to 10 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Martinez was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on July 22, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Allison Nichole Daniel was sentenced to 10 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Daniel was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on May 27, 2020, after she pleaded guilty.
    • Enrique Rodriguez-Govea was sentenced to 10 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Rodriguez-Govea was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on May 30, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Taurus Basil Stephens was sentenced to 10 years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Stephens was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on December 16, 2020, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Raheem Jamal Morris was sentenced to nine years in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release. Morris was convicted of Conspiracy and Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on June 26, 2023, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Lilia Martinez Rodriguez was sentenced to eight years in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release. Martinez Rodriguez was convicted of Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering on September 21, 2020, after she pleaded guilty.
    • Roberto Rojas was sentenced to eight years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Rojas was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on January 13, 2023, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Nicholas Charles Johnson was sentenced to seven years, eight months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Johnson was convicted of Conspiracy and Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on July 10, 2023, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Leonardo Rosas was sentenced to six years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Rosas was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on October 3, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Daniel Gonzalez was sentenced to five years, four months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Gonzalez was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on July 11, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Juan Torres Chavez was sentenced to a time-served sentence of approximately four years, nine months in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release. Chavez was convicted of Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on December 14, 2023, after he pleaded guilty.
    • David Chavez-Ortiz was sentenced to four years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Chavez-Ortiz was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, Heroin, and Fentanyl on October 21, 2019, after he pleaded guilty.
    • Antwonette Jarnez Thomas was sentenced to four years in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Thomas was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on January 7, 2021, after she pleaded guilty.
    • Erin Cortez was sentenced to three years in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release. Cortez was convicted of Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on January 22, 2020, after she pleaded guilty.
    • Joaquin Flores, Jr. was sentenced to three years in prison to be followed by three years of supervised release. Flores was convicted of Conspiracy and Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine on January 19, 2024, after he pleaded guilty. 

    Eusebio Paniagua-Paz remains a fugitive.  If you have any information about his whereabouts, please contact your local law enforcement agency. 

    This case was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, with valuable assistance provided by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Marshals Service, Atlanta Police Department, Cobb County Sheriff’s Office, Coweta County Sheriff’s Office, DeKalb County Police Department, Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office, Georgia Department of Corrections, Georgia State Patrol, and the South Fulton Police Department.

    Assistant United States Attorneys Alison B. Prout, Amy M. Palumbo, Elizabeth M. Hathaway, Sarah Klapman, and Nicholas Evert, together with former Assistant United States Attorneys Tyler Mann, Scott McAfee, and Erin H. Harris, prosecuted the case.

    This effort is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) operation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found at https://www.justice.gov/OCDETF.

    For further information please contact the U.S. Attorney’s Public Affairs Office at USAGAN.PressEmails@usdoj.gov or (404) 581-6280.  The Internet address for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia is http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndga.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation Announces Quarterly Cash Dividend of 25 Cents per Share

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ALTAVISTA, Va., Feb. 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation (“Pinnacle” or the “Company”) (OTCQX: PPBN), the one-bank holding company for First National Bank (the “Bank”), announced today that its Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.25 per share on February 11, 2025, payable March 7, 2025, to shareholders of record as of February 21, 2025.

    The $0.25 per share cash dividend is equal to the $0.25 dividend paid last quarter and marks the fiftieth consecutive quarter that a dividend has been declared.

    “Pinnacle is pleased to provide a cash dividend of $0.25 per share to our shareholders this quarter,” stated Aubrey H. Hall, III, President and Chief Executive Officer for both the Company and the Bank. Mr. Hall further commented, “This return on investment is consistent with the cash dividend paid in the fourth quarter of 2024 and is based on our continued solid performance.”

    Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation is a locally managed community banking organization serving Central and Southern Virginia. The one-bank holding company of First National Bank serves market areas consisting primarily of all or portions of the Counties of Amherst, Bedford, Campbell, Halifax, and Pittsylvania, and the Cities of Charlottesville, Danville, and Lynchburg. The Company has a total of nineteen branches with one branch in Amherst County within the Town of Amherst, two branches in Bedford County; five branches in Campbell County, including two within the Town of Altavista, where the Bank was founded; one branch in the City of Charlottesville, three branches in the City of Danville; three branches in the City of Lynchburg; and three branches in Pittsylvania County, including one within the Town of Chatham. A Loan Production Office and a full-service branch have recently been opened in the South Boston area of Halifax County. First National Bank is in its 117th year of operation.

    This press release may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of federal securities laws that involve significant risks and uncertainties. Any statements contained herein that are not historical facts are forward-looking and are based on current assumptions and analysis by the Company. These forward-looking statements, including statements made in Mr. Hall’s quotes may include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the credit quality of our asset portfolio in future periods, the expected losses of nonperforming loans in future periods, returns and capital accretion during future periods, our cost of funds, the maintenance of our net interest margin, future operating results and business performance and our growth initiatives. Although we believe our plans and expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, our ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain, and we can give no assurance that these plans or expectations will be achieved. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from management’s expectations include, but are not limited to: changes in consumer spending and saving habits that may occur, including increased inflation; changes in general business, economic and market conditions; attracting, hiring, training, motivating and retaining qualified employees; changes in fiscal and monetary policies, and laws and regulations; changes in interest rates, inflation rates, deposit flows, loan demand and real estate values; changes in the quality or composition of the Company’s loan portfolio and the value of the collateral securing loans; changes in macroeconomic trends and uncertainty, including liquidity concerns at other financial institutions, and the potential for local and/or global economic recession; changes in demand for financial services in Pinnacle’s market areas; increased competition from both banks and non-banks in Pinnacle’s market areas; a deterioration in credit quality and/or a reduced demand for, or supply of, credit; increased information security risk, including cyber security risk, which may lead to potential business disruptions or financial losses; volatility in the securities markets generally, including in the value of securities in the Company’s securities portfolio or in the market price of Pinnacle common stock specifically; and other factors, which could cause actual results to differ materially from future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating the forward-looking statements contained herein, and you should not place undue reliance on such statements, which reflect our views as of the date of this release.

    CONTACT: Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation, Bryan M. Lemley, 434-477-5882 or bryanlemley@1stnatbk.com

    The MIL Network