NewzIntel.com

Category: Banking

  • MIL-OSI Security: South Lake Tahoe Man Sentenced to over 2 Years in Prison for Impersonating Federal Officers

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Anton Andreyevich Iagounov, 38, of South Lake Tahoe, was sentenced today by U.S. District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta to two years and three months in prison for four counts of impersonating a federal officer, Acting U.S. Attorney Michele Beckwith announced.

    According to court documents, and evidence presented at a three-day trial in July 2024, Iagounov pretended to be a federal law enforcement agent by creating and sending counterfeit investigative documents, which he signed in the name of a fictional federal agent, seeking highly protected information from the Department of Defense.

    “The defendant impersonated federal officers and tried multiple times to obtain protected information using fake court documents,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Beckwith. “Many federal agencies including NASA have devoted law enforcement officers, and we will not tolerate federal officers being illegally impersonated.”

    “Mr. Iagounov’s attempt to undermine public trust in order to obtain sensitive government information posed a significant risk, potentially endangering national security and the integrity of NASA and government operations,” said Michael Graham, Acting Assistant Inspector General for Investigations. “This sentencing demonstrates the commitment of NASA OIG, the USAO, and our law enforcement partners to safeguarding Federal assets and holding accountable those who undermine justice.”

    “The defendant impersonated a federal law enforcement officer and took advantage of the trust that exists between federal agencies,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Jeremy N. Schwartz of the FBI Las Vegas Division. “All officers carry badges and credentials that are used to verify their identity. If you believe someone is impersonating an officer, you may ask their agency to confirm their official business. This sentencing demonstrates the excellent work achievable through partnerships.”

    On July 5, 2022, Iagounov sent a search warrant he had created to the U.S. Capitol Police, falsely claiming it was signed by a Special Agent of NASA Office of Inspector General (NASA‑OIG) and appearing to be authorized by a U.S. District Court judge for the District of Columbia. The Capitol Police investigated the document, determined it was fake, and referred it to NASA-OIG for further investigation.

    On July 11, 2022, Iagounov again pretended to be the same fictional NASA-OIG agent and sent the warrant to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. This time, he sent it without a judge’s signature, indicating it was for an “emergency filing” and required a judge’s signature. He sent it from an email address designed to look like it was from a United States government agency, but which Iagounov owned and had named to look like a government agency’s internet domain.

    On July 18, 2022, Iagounov again sent the fake search warrant, purporting to be signed by the same fictitious NASA-OIG agent. He sent it to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Georgia, again indicating that it was for an emergency filing and needed a judge’s signature immediately.

    Finally, on July 24, 2022, Iagounov faxed a letter, under the name of a real NASA-OIG supervising agent, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida. In that letter, he claimed to be following up on the warrant, stating that an “exigent circumstance” required a judge’s signature immediately. The faxed letter included an anonymous email address for the agent that actually belonged to Iagounov. Several days earlier, on July 15, Iagounov had sent his warrant to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Florida but had received no response.

    In each case, given the apparently sensitive nature of the materials Iagounov’s warrant sought, the receiving personnel for the Courts referred the matter to NASA-OIG for review and investigation.

    This case was the product of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and NASA Office of Inspector General, with assistance by the South Lake Tahoe Police Department and the Carson City Sheriff’s Office. Assistant U.S. Attorneys James Conolly and Audrey Hemesath prosecuted the case. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn Questions USTR Nominee Greer on China, Outbound Investment Prohibition Proposal

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn

    WASHINGTON – Today during the Senate Finance Committee’s hearing on the nomination of Jamieson Greer to be United States Trade Representative (USTR) under the Trump administration, U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) discussed with him the importance of reciprocal trade relationships and his proposal to prohibit U.S. investment in certain technologies in China in order to restore American dominance on the world stage and safeguard our national security. Excerpts are below, and video can be found here.

    CORNYN: “China cheats, China steals our intellectual property, and they don’t recognize a rules-based international order.”

    “President Trump was the President who first raised this issue in a very dramatic sort of way, and I think he’s exactly right to insist upon reciprocity as a principle. Do you agree that reciprocity ought to be the basic principle that drives our trade policy?”

    GREER: “You’ve been a leader on this issue, with respect to investment flows as well with China, and you watch this very closely, so I appreciate your insights here.”

    “We do have to have a balanced relationship. I think the United States has always been willing to have a balanced relationship with China, but there’s Chinese agency in this matter, and they need to decide how open they want to be to us.”

    CORNYN: “Your response reminds me of the conversation we had in my office, and thank you for coming by to visit. I talked to you a little bit about something that we’re working on in the Banking Committee—Senator Scott, Chairman of the Banking Committee, and others—on a bipartisan basis, working on an outbound investment transparency law.”

    “Do you think it just makes sense that we should have transparency over investments being made in China that may well fuel the modernization of their military in a way that’s a threat to the peace in the Indo-Pacific and beyond?”

    GREER: “Having this kind of transparency is very important. In fact, again, I keep referring back to the Trump administration’s policy memo on trade because it is so comprehensive and gives such a clear direction on these things.  One of the things it talks about is looking at current efforts around outbound investment to foreign countries of concern, and so I think consideration of this kind of control or data gathering information, I think that goes right along with exploring that.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: IMF Press Briefing Transcript – Julie Kozack

    Source: International Monetary Fund

    February 6, 2025

    INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND PRESS BRIEFING

    Washington, D.C. Thursday, February 6, 2025

    P R O C E E D I N G S

    1. KOZACK: Good morning, everyone. It’s great to see you all, here in person and online. Welcome to the first IMF press briefing for 2025. I’m Julie Kozak, Director of the Communication Department. As usual, this briefing is embargoed until 11:00 a.m. U.S. Eastern Time. I’ll start with a few announcements and then I’ll move to take your questions in person, on WebEx, and via the Press Center.

       First, Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva will travel to Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. The Managing Director will visit Ethiopia on February 8th and 9th to meet Prime Minister Abiy and his team, and this visit will take stock of the economic reforms and progress that is being made by the country. She will also meet with stakeholders, including representatives of the private sector.

    The Managing Director will also travel to the United Arab Emirates to participate in the Arab Fiscal Forum on February 10th and the World Government Summit on February 11th where she will deliver keynote remarks. On February 16th and 17th, the Managing Director will participate in a two-day conference in Saudi Arabia on building resilience of emerging market economies. The conference is co-organized by the IMF and the Saudi Finance Ministry.

    The First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath will travel to Japan to join the Article IV mission. She will participate in meetings with the authorities and hold a press conference on February 7th at 10:30 a.m. Tokyo time.

    Finally, Deputy Managing Director Okamura will travel to Japan to participate in a jointly organized IMF-JICA conference on Economic and Fiscal Policy Challenges and Prospects for Asia. And this is scheduled for February 12 and 13.

    And with that I will now open the floor for your questions. For those connecting virtually, please do turn on both your camera and the microphone when speaking. Let’s get started.

    QUESTIONER: Hi,I was just wondering, you mentioned Ethiopia. How concerned are you about sort of countries with large IMF programs which also receive a substantial amount of support from USAID, considering the recent executive order, countries like Ethiopia and Ukraine, for example. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Thanks very much. So with respect to your question, you know we are closely following the announcements and developments regarding USAID. At this stage it’s too early to gauge the precise impact on the countries that it supports. We’ll wait for clarity on the next steps, including any changes to the scope of the work of USAID.

    QUESTIONER: So, the IMF mission is going to start working in Ukraine this month. Could you specify please what main issues will the Fund plan to focus on during the Seventh Review of the EFF program. And the second question is about the pension reform in Ukraine. Ukrainian government committed to starting this reform this year. Could you elaborate on what key changes the IMF expects from Ukraine on this area? Thank you.

    KOZACK: Are there any other questions on Ukraine?

    QUESTIONER: So, according to latest information, the review of the EFF is scheduled to begin this month. When the decision on the disbursement is going to be made and what amount of funds are going to be provided with this fund? And the follow-up, how much money is left in the EFF according to the current situation? Are there any plans to expand this program? Thank you.

    QUESTIONER: Just to follow up on the question about Ethiopia. Obviously, the USAID cuts also affect Ukraine pretty significantly. And I wonder, you know, both in those cases and in all cases involving USAID funding, whether you are working with the US ED here and sort of sending a message about the impact. So, whether you’ve kind of figured it out across the enterprise and across all the countries that the IMF works with as well. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Anything else on Ukraine online? Okay. So, on Ukraine, just to remind everyone of the context. So, on December 20th, the IMF’s Executive Board approved the Sixth Review of the EFF program. That enabled the disbursement of $1.1 billion and that brought total disbursements under the program to $9.8 billion. And the total size of the program, I believe, was $15.6 billion. So, the difference between those two is what would be remaining. At that time, the Board assessed that program performance remained strong. The authorities had met all of the benchmarks and prior actions for the review.

    With respect to the next mission, the technical work for the upcoming review is underway. The mission dates are in the process of being finalized, and once we have them, we’ll be sure to communicate that. During this upcoming mission, the IMF staff will engage with the authorities on fiscal policy, including progress on revenue mobilization, monetary policies for 2025, and also progress in ensuring that debt sustainability and fiscal sustainability are restored. Staff will also be reviewing governance reforms, which remain a key pillar for the program. Based on the approved calendar of disbursements, subject to completion of the next review and, of course, subject to Board approval, Ukraine would have access to about $900 million for that next review.

    With respect to pension reform, the government has committed to launch pension reforms this year in 2025, and they would be spearheaded by the Ministry of Social Policy. And those reforms are supported by external partners, notably the World Bank. What I can also add is that the authorities are in the process of developing a comprehensive set of proposals for pension reforms, but it’s too early to tell exactly what will be included in those proposals and what the changes may be.

    And on the second question, I don’t really have much to add to what I already said, other than obviously we’re paying close attention and we’re awaiting further details.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Just on Syria, can you give us an update if the IMF has made any contact with the new government and if there are any plans to provide a loan package to the country? Thank you.

    KOZACK: We’re closely monitoring, obviously, the situation in Syria, and we stand ready to support the international community’s efforts to assist Syria’s reconstruction as needed and when conditions allow. With respect to our engagement, we have not had a meaningful engagement with Syria since 2009, which was the time of the last Article IV Consultation, and this has been due to the difficult security situation in the country.

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions, and they’re Caribbean-related questions. Can you provide a breakdown of the growth projections for the Caribbean region, more specifically, focusing on St. Kitts and Nevis, and what factors are driving the projected growth or decline outlook for the region, more specifically, the Caribbean region?

    KOZACK: Okay. All right, let me step back and give a little bit of an overview of where we stand, what our view is on the Caribbean. So, following the rapid recovery after the Pandemic, real GDP growth in the region has normalized in recent years. Average GDP growth for the region, and this is excluding Guyana and Haiti, is estimated at 2.2 percent for 2023, 2.4 percent for 2024. And growth, our projection is for growth to remain relatively stable at 2.4 percent in 2025.

    Broadly speaking, there are sort of two groups of countries in the Caribbean. So, we look at tourism-dependent economies, and there we see that growth in tourism economies has slowed as tourism arrivals have returned to pre-Pandemic levels. And then for commodity-exporting countries, they have faced challenges in the energy sector but have overall benefited from robust performance in their non-energy sector, and that has been driven by supportive and economic policies.

    I can also add that inflation in most Caribbean countries has moderated significantly over the past few years, and the decline was due to lower global commodity prices and easing of supply chain disruptions. And we expect inflation to remain moderate in the years to come.

    QUESTIONER: My question is on the comment by Managing Director Georgieva in Davos. MD mentioned in Davos clearly that more cooperation in the regional levels might be needed in the future in such a fragmented world and IMF would support such a movement. And could you give me some more detailed plans?

    KOZACK: Thanks very much for the question. What the Managing Director noted in Davos is that we are seeing shifting patterns in global cooperation, in trade, and in other areas, including financial and capital flows. And of course, as a global institution, what will be important for us is as we engage with our membership, right, to take all of this into account to ensure that we can give our members the best policy advice within our mandate of economic and financial stability.

    QUESTIONER: Thanks so much, Julie. I wanted to ask you very broadly about the changes that are happening in the United States and the tariffs that President Trump has announced. Now the implementation of the tariffs on Canada and Mexico has been delayed to March 1st. And, you know, it’s not clear what will happen there exactly. But one of the, you know, the tariffs on China have stayed in place. China has now announced tariffs that will kick in on February 10th. The IMF has warned repeatedly against rising protectionism and also kind of cataloged the thousands of trade restrictions that have been put in place and growing over time since COVID. Can you just walk us through what your perception is right now? The markets have been really all over the place, you know, sort of up and down depending on the day’s mood. Do you see this period of trade uncertainty that you warned about in the WEO, kind of really affecting and dampening global growth prospects? Thanks.

    KOZACK: Thanks very much. Let me see if anyone else has questions on this broad topic.

    QUESTIONER: Thank you. Yeah, I was just wondering, just to follow on the previous question, how you sort of think about the unpredictability of of these tariffs or the discussions around the tariffs, the uncertainty that that kind of brings up, and potentially how that could affect monetary policy. We’ve seen a lot of analysts talking about how they no longer expect the Fed to cut, or they expect the Fed to cut maybe only once this year. I’m just sort of wondering how you’re kind of in real time or as close to real time as you can, sort of taking on board that unpredictability when you think about the U.S. economy and the impacts for global growth. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Great. And you also had a question.

    QUESTIONER: Yes. Just following up with my colleagues. What sort of study, if any, has the IMF undertaken to better understand the global ramifications of these tariffs? We know they’re on pause for another 30 days or so or less. And what sort of impact would small states that are heavily dependent on the United States feel going forward?

    KOZACK: And let me go online to see if anyone online has a question along these lines.

    QUESTIONER: It is very similar. Just wondering the fact that it’s not just tariffs that have imposed on China, but the threat of tariffs on countries across the EU, Canada, and Mexico, and what effect that has on the global outlook. Thank you.

    KOZACK: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else online want to come in on this topic? Okay. So, what I can say on this issue is we’re following the announcements by the U.S. with respect to tariffs on Chinese goods and potentially Canadian and Mexican goods. We’re following these announcements. We believe that it’s in the interest of all to find a constructive way forward to resolve this issue.

    With respect to the assessment, assessing the full impact of these measures of tariffs, it’s actually going to depend on several factors, and let me lay those out. One of those factors is going to be the responses of the countries concerned. Another factor will be how firms and consumers react. And finally, how the measures evolve over time will also have an impact.

    So, at this stage, that’s what I can share with you. We will, of course, have more information over time and in due course as the situation evolves.

    QUESTIONER: Julie, I’m sorry, I think the question is, like, can you say something about what uncertainty does to the global economy? I mean, you’ve talked about this in WEO’s before, but do you see this as a period of heightened uncertainty now that Trump has taken office? And, you know, what is the impact of that uncertainty on things like investment and all this, you know, the sort of categories of economic indicators that we look at?

    KOZACK: So, I think what I can say is, of course, I would refer you to the WEO for some of those analysis. And again, assessing the full impact of this will include all of the factors that I just laid out. And we would take into account issues related to uncertainty, market reactions, et cetera, in an assessment that we will ultimately undertake as the situation evolves and once we have more information.

    Let me now go online. I see a couple of hands up. So, if you’re online, please go ahead and jump in.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Well, has the letter of intent between the IMF and Argentina been prepared? Or let me ask in a different way. Are the negotiations between Argentina and the IMF already in the final stage?

    KOZACK: Thanks. Other questions on Argentina?

    QUESTIONER: Could you give me any updates on the negotiations of the new agreement and what are the most challenging issues they are facing right now? And also yesterday, Minister Luis Caputo said a new agreement will not imply a devaluation of the peso or the exit of the exchange restrictions the next day. Does the IMF agree with this statement?

    KOZACK: Thanks. Others on Argentina?

    QUESTIONER: Hi, Julie. I was wondering also if you could give some input regarding the meetings that the mission in Buenos Aires had, if they have only been talking to government officials or if they are also contacting unions and other opposition representatives. And also, the new crawling peg of 1 percent has started this February. I was wondering if that was a matter of discussion between the staff and the government.

    KOZACK: Thanks, other questions?

    QUESTIONER: Yes, thank you, Julie. So, my question is also on the crawling peg. So, is the IMF concerned about the greater exchange rate delay generated by this reduction of the crawling peg from 2 percent to 1 percent started the 1st of February?

    KOZACK: Any other questions on Argentina? Okay, I hear two more. Please go ahead.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, Julie, I wanted to know if Argentina has already paid a debt due on February 1st or when is it expected to do so? And if there is a meeting plan between Argentina authorities and the IMF network staff in Washington.

    KOZACK: Thank you. Next.

    QUESTIONER: Good morning. The question is if Argentina and the IMF comes to a new agreement, should it be like we are talking here in Argentina about $5 million? It will be for anything special, for example, to leave what we call cepo, or it depends on the Argentine authorities.

    KOZACK: Any other questions on Argentina? Okay, I do not see anyone coming in.

    So, on Argentina, what I can share is first that, as the Managing Director highlighted after her meeting with President Milei last month, we recognize Argentina’s tremendous progress in reducing inflation, stabilizing the economy, returning to growth, and with poverty finally starting to decline. We continue to engage constructively with the Argentine authorities. And a staff mission did recently visit Buenos Aires to advance discussions on a new program. The new program will aim to build on the gains that have been achieved so far, while also addressing the remaining challenges that the country faces. Constructive and frequent discussions continue, and we will provide further details on next steps when we have them.

    I can also just add that to sustain early gains, there is a shared recognition between the Fund staff and the Argentine authorities about the need to continue to adopt a consistent set of fiscal, monetary, and foreign exchange policies while furthering growth-enhancing reforms. I also know that you have a lot of interest, and there were a lot of detailed questions here, but given that the discussions are continuing and there has been good progress so far, we do want to ensure that there is space for staff and the authorities to continue these constructive discussions. And of course, we will communicate more when we have further details.

    Okay, let us go online because I see a few hands up.

    QUESTIONER: My question is, when do we expect Board of Directors to discuss Egypt Fourth Review?

    KOZACK: Do we have other questions on Egypt?

    QUESTIONER: Hi, I’d like to ask, in addition to that, when the board does discuss Egypt’s Fourth Review, will it also be discussing an additional RSF for Egypt? There have been some reports that Egypt is in line to receive as much as $1 billion.

    KOZACK: Other questions?

    QUESTIONER:  I just wanted to ask, in terms of the assessment of Egypt, but also other countries in the region, to what extent you are calculating additional costs and spending needs that have to do with Gaza and with the potential absorption of Palestinian refugees that has been proposed.

    KOZACK: Okay, any other questions on Egypt? I see I have two questions that have come through the press center, which I will read aloud. So, the first is when will the IMF’s Executive Board complete the Fourth Review of the Extended Arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility for Egypt?

    The second question is regarding the Executive Board’s approval of the Fourth Review of Egypt’s program, could it be this month? Does the IMF have updates on your projections for Egypt’s economy in light of regional updates?

    Let me share with you where we are on Egypt. On December 24, the IMF staff and the Egyptian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Fourth Review of the EFF. This review is subject to approval of our Executive Board and subject to that approval, Egypt would have access to about $1.2 billion. Preparations for Board consideration are underway, and the Board meeting is expected to take place in the coming weeks.

    In light of the difficult external conditions and challenging domestic environment, the IMF staff and the Egyptian authorities agreed to recalibrate the fiscal consolidation path, and this was agreed in December, I would highlight, to create fiscal space for critical social programs benefiting vulnerable groups and the middle class while ensuring debt sustainability.

    Looking forward, reform priorities comprise lowering inflation, sustaining exchange rate flexibility, and liberalized access to foreign exchange. In addition, the program aims to boost domestic revenues. It aims to improve the business environment. It aims to accelerate disinvestment or divestment rather and leveling [of] the playing field between state-owned enterprises and the private sector. And of course, it also aims to enhance governance and transparency.

    With respect to the question on the RSF, a policy package of reforms will be considered by the Fund’s Executive Board along with the Fourth Review of Egypt’s program.

    And lastly, there is no connection at the moment between some of the announcements in Gaza and the and the Egypt program.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, I wonder if I can just clarify. On the RSF, you say a policy package of reforms that also presumably comes with some additional funding. Can you confirm whether the amount of up to $1 billion is accurate?

    KOZACK: I can’t confirm now the precise amount of the RSF, but of course as we have more information, we will provide that.

    QUESTIONER: Thank you so much.

    KOZACK: Let us go online. I see another hand online and then we will come back. Just one follow up, a follow up. Go ahead.

    QUESTIONER: You cannot confirm the amount of the RSF. So just so we are clear, are you confirming that there are discussions around an RSF? Thanks.

    KOZACK: Yes, there’s discussions on an RSF and the intention is to present the RSF with its package of reforms to our Executive Board at the same time as we present the Fourth Review of the EFF.

    QUESTIONER: Question about Rwanda and Eastern Congo. I wanted to know, I know that the IMF has programs with both Rwanda and the DRC. And I wanted to know, you know, given the M23 incursion, the fall of Goma, how the programs can react to it, if there is anything you can say about that. And also, obviously, in El Salvador, they changed their cryptocurrency law, but it is also reported that they recently bought 50 bitcoins. So, some people are for the kind of national treasury. Some people are confused in terms of what the contours of the limitations put on. And I wonder if you could comment on that. Thanks a lot.

    KOZACK: Okay, thank you. Any other questions on these countries? DRC, Rwanda, El Salvador?

    Okay, let me start with DRC and I want to start by saying that, you know, we are deeply saddened by the loss of lives and the humanitarian crisis in the Eastern part of DRC. We are closely monitoring the situation, including its potential impact on neighboring countries and the region. And of course, we are also closely monitoring with respect to potential impact on our program.

    With respect to Rwanda, what I can say on Rwanda is simply that the country continues to demonstrate a robust commitment to advancing policy reforms. And In December of 2024, our Executive Board concluded the Fourth Review of Rwanda’s programs.

    With respect to El Salvador, just to step back and remind, IMF staff and the Salvadorian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on December 18th for a new arrangement, a new EFF arrangement. The arrangement would be for about $1.4 billion to support the government’s reform agenda, and this agreement is subject to approval by the IMF’s Executive Board.

    I can also add that as explained in the press release that we issued following the staff-level agreement, the new Fund supported program aims to reduce the potential risks of the bitcoin project. Once in place, purchases of bitcoin will be confined under the program as agreed.

    QUESTIONER: Thank you, Julie. Good morning, everyone. A few things. In Zimbabwe, when you expect a deal for the Staff Monitored Program? And on Lebanon, have you had any contact with the new government? Are there any signs that you are going to be able to work with them? Also on Senegal, can you give us any update on the resolution of the suspension of the financing program there? And lastly, are there any concerns of a drop in the commitment of funding from the U.S.? The 2025 project calls for the U.S. to stop putting money into the World Bank and the IMF. So, are you guys concerned about that?

    KOZACK: Okay, thanks. Starting with Zimbabwe, I do not have an update for you for today on Zimbabwe, but we will come back to you bilaterally.

    On Lebanon, what I can share is that, you know, we welcome the election of General Aoun as president of Lebanon, and we look forward to working with him and his new government to address the challenges facing the Lebanese economy. And just to remind, Lebanon continues to face profound economic challenges, and the conflict had exacerbated an already fragile macroeconomic and social situation. The election of the president, the formation of a new government, as well as the ceasefire, are critical to support policy actions and reforms that would allow the gradual return to the normalization of economic activity in Lebanon.

    And what I can share on Senegal is that we are actively engaged in discussions with the authorities on addressing the misreporting case. Senegal’s Court of Auditors is expected to issue its final report this month. In parallel, IMF staff are working closely with the authorities to identify their capacity development needs and to implement corrective measures needed to address the root causes of the misreporting. These efforts are aimed at enhancing transparency, strengthening accountability, and preventing a recurrence of similar misreporting in the future.

    And I think, on your final question, all I can say here is that the United States is the IMF’s largest shareholder, and it plays an extremely valuable role in helping ensure global financial stability. We have a long history of working with successive U.S. administrations, and we look forward to continuing to do so.

    QUESTIONER: Thanks, Julie. Thank you for taking my question. When do you think we can expect the Executive Board’s approval on the next tranche for the Island Nation? And if there is any delay, what sort of reason is there? Is there more for the government to do? And secondly, the budget for the country is expected in a few weeks. Has the IMF given any input on preparing this budget, given the fact that the country is still in the EFF program?

    KOZACK: Thanks. So, your question was on Sri Lanka? And yes, I see you nodding. So, if anyone else has questions on Sri Lanka, I can take them now. Okay. If not, let me go ahead with Sri Lanka.

    So, on Sri Lanka on November 23rd, IMF staff and the Sri Lankan authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Third Review of Sri Lanka’s EFF program. Once approved by the IMF’s Executive Board, Sri Lanka will have access to about $333 million in financing. And we expect the Board meeting to take place in the coming weeks.

    Here, I would also just like to take the opportunity to emphasize that Sri Lanka’s ambitious reform agenda is delivering commendable outcomes. The economy expanded by 5.5 percent in the fourth — third quarter of 2024. Average headline and core inflation remain contained well below the target during the fourth quarter of 2024. And international reserves increased to $6.1 billion at the end of 2024.

    With respect to the specific question on the budget, what I can share is that the staff-level agreement that I mentioned, which was reached in November, will be presented to the Executive Board or is subject to Executive Board approval, but it’s also contingent upon, among other things, implementation by the authorities of prior actions, including submission of the 2025 budget that is consistent with parameters identified under the program.

    QUESTIONER: Most of the questions we had have been touched upon, and I would just reinforce as well what colleagues had said earlier about trying to get a sense of what all this uncertainty around tariffs will mean. I know there is a tendency to talk about the policies once they are implemented and the impact. But given the fact that policies get announced and withdrawn and swung around, it seems like the uncertainty has more of the impact than the actual policy. But all that seems to be covered. I will get to — actually, the only outstanding question we have now is if you could update us on the status of the Mozambique program and if there is a risk to that program’s existence right now, given what is going on. That is for our Africa colleagues. Everything else was covered. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

    1. KOZACK: Thank you very much. So, on Mozambique, what I can share is that the Article IV Consultation and the Fourth Review of the Extended Credit Facility, or ECF, were completed back in July of 2024. An IMF team will visit Maputo in the coming weeks to engage with the new government. We do remain engaged to support the country’s efforts toward remaining macroeconomic stability, accelerating growth and making growth more inclusive, in line with the arrangements. But given that there is a mission in the coming weeks, we will have more to report toward the end of that engagement.

    QUESTIONER: Julie, regarding Russia, are there any developments concerning the postponed mission to Russia to evaluate progress in economy that was stopped in September due to necessity to gather additional information and make additional analysis. Anything we should expect this year, probably? Thank you.

    KOZACK: Unfortunately, I don’t yet have an update for you or a timeline for the Article IV.

    QUESTIONER: One final question. Thank you. Sorry, Julie, I’m going to try again with a sort of a similar question. But, you know, we are seeing a fundamental shift in the global and potentially in the support that is available for developing countries. The United States has ended foreign assistance. It has frozen funding for the World Food Program. It is pulling out of and talking about pulling out of the World Health Organization. These are institutions that are part, writ large, of the Bretton Woods system in which the IMF is such a key player.

    So, I do not think it’s unfair of us to be asking for some guidance from you about how you at an institution like the IMF are approaching this period of time that is marked by uncertainty, not just for the markets or for global trade, but also for the institutions themselves. And, you know, we have seen some initial reports that Elon Musk’s DOGE employees or people who work with DOGE are starting to look at the World Bank and other institutions.

    And I, you know, so I guess we want to hear something from you that is a little bit broader about the time that we’re in and what it means, because it obviously has implications for other countries, too, if they’re going to fill the gap in the developing thing. And, you know, you have been warning for years that the developing economies face a kind of perfect storm of different difficult circumstances. This seems like it adds to, to it. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Thanks very much. Look, what I can say now is really what I’ve been saying. I really do not have much to add other than that we are a global institution. We have a clearly defined mandate to support economic and financial stability globally and just ultimately support growth and employment in the world economy. We are continuing as an institution to remain laser-focused, of course, on that mandate. And we, as a global institution, take our responsibility to serve our membership very, very seriously. And we will continue to do everything that we need to do to serve our membership in the best possible way. You know, we do, as I said, have a long history of working with successive U.S. administrations, and we look forward to continuing to do so as an institution for which the U.S. is our largest shareholder.

    And with this, I’m going to bring this press briefing to an end. Thank you all for your participation today. As a reminder, this briefing is embargoed until 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time today. A transcript will be made available later on IMF.org, and as usual, in case of clarifications, additional queries, or anything else, please reach out to my colleagues at media@mf.org.

    This does conclude our first press briefing of the year. I wish everyone a wonderful day and I do look forward to seeing you next time. Thank you all so much for joining, and please be safe given the weather outside here in D.C. Thank you, everyone.

    * * * * *

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER:

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

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lee Introduces Bill Making Trump Ban on Central Bank Digital Currency Permanent

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Utah Mike Lee

    WASHINGTON – Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) reintroduced the No CBDC Act to prevent the Federal Reserve from reshaping the U.S. financial sector and having the ability to monitor consumer transactions through a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). President Donald Trump recently banned federal agencies from creating a CBDC through an executive order; this legislation would enshrine the ban permanently in law. It is co-sponsored by Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rick Scott (R-FL) in the Senate. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) is introducing the House companion bill. 

    “The United States doesn’t need to create a Central Bank Digital Currency to know it is a bad idea,” said Sen. Lee. “We’ve seen this play out in China with the digital Yuan. In early trials, China canceled its citizens’ money after a set period, forcing Chinese citizens to spend their savings at the compulsion of the government. My bill protects Americans from a similar intrusion by prohibiting the Federal Reserve or any federal government agency from minting or issuing a CBDC, whether through a direct-to-consumer or intermediated model.”

    “CBDCs are nothing more than a tool for tyrants to intimidate, control, and surveil the activities of American citizens, and it is my duty as a patriot to stop them.” said Rep. Ogles. “I am honored to co-lead this effort with Senator Lee.”

    BACKGROUND:

    During the Biden Administration, the Federal Reserve (“the Fed”) began to develop a potential framework – known as Project Cedar – for a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), a digital asset issued and controlled by the Fed. A CBDC would alter the ability of financial institutions to function as lenders, while giving the federal government knowledge of every purchase that uses a CBDC. 

    Financial institutions would be significantly restricted in offering loans, instead being relegated to functioning merely as wallets. A CBDC,  in many ways, allows the Fed to replace the role of banks as financial intermediaries, thereby granting the government far more power over the economy, inflation, and investment decisions. In other words, free enterprise and financial privacy would be dealt a critical blow with the creation of a CBDC.

    Lastly, the Federal Reserve would have knowledge of every transaction involving a CBDC; if it maintains the technology to create and operate a CBDC, Big Brother will know Americans’ every purchase. 

    SUPPORT:

     “Americans demand financial protection and privacy after facing the threat of unelected federal bureaucrats creating an invasive, all-seeing central bank digital currency controlled by the government. With a new conservative trifecta government, now is the time for Congress to protect Americans’ individual liberties and prohibit the government from centralizing its control over the economy. Heritage Action commends Sen. Lee for introducing this necessary legislation to safeguard Americans’ rights and promote freedom from financial intimidation.”

    -Ryan Walker, Heritage Action Executive Vice President

     “A Central Bank Digital Currency creates a fully traceable and controllable digital money that has dastardly implications for civil liberties and economic freedom. Rather than offering separation of money and state as found in Satoshi’s innovation of Bitcoin, CBDCs merge the power of state and money in a programmable way that would be easily abused and prove harmful to individual liberty and financial freedom.

    Sen. Lee’s No CBDC Act would enshrine in law a prohibition against the Federal Reserve taking the United States down this path. On behalf of consumers who cherish their economic liberties, freedom of choice, and access to innovative technology, we applaud the Senator’s efforts with this bill, and hope many more legislators align on the issue to defend our rights to financial privacy”

    -Yaël Ossowski, deputy director of the Consumer Choice Center

    “Senator Lee is leading the way in this important fight to prevent the government from creating an entirely new tool of financial control and surveillance. A federally issued CBDC would be either entirely useless or, more likely, deeply dangerous. Thanks to Senator Lee’s leadership, Congress is stepping in to make clear that the executive branch has overstepped its authorities and must halt this deeply misguided debacle at once.”

    -David Williams, president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance. 

    For a one-pager, click HERE.

    For full bill text, click HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Press Briefing Transcript – Julie Kozack

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    February 6, 2025

    INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND PRESS BRIEFING

    Washington, D.C. Thursday, February 6, 2025

    P R O C E E D I N G S

    1. KOZACK: Good morning, everyone. It’s great to see you all, here in person and online. Welcome to the first IMF press briefing for 2025. I’m Julie Kozak, Director of the Communication Department. As usual, this briefing is embargoed until 11:00 a.m. U.S. Eastern Time. I’ll start with a few announcements and then I’ll move to take your questions in person, on WebEx, and via the Press Center.

       First, Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva will travel to Ethiopia, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. The Managing Director will visit Ethiopia on February 8th and 9th to meet Prime Minister Abiy and his team, and this visit will take stock of the economic reforms and progress that is being made by the country. She will also meet with stakeholders, including representatives of the private sector.

    The Managing Director will also travel to the United Arab Emirates to participate in the Arab Fiscal Forum on February 10th and the World Government Summit on February 11th where she will deliver keynote remarks. On February 16th and 17th, the Managing Director will participate in a two-day conference in Saudi Arabia on building resilience of emerging market economies. The conference is co-organized by the IMF and the Saudi Finance Ministry.

    The First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath will travel to Japan to join the Article IV mission. She will participate in meetings with the authorities and hold a press conference on February 7th at 10:30 a.m. Tokyo time.

    Finally, Deputy Managing Director Okamura will travel to Japan to participate in a jointly organized IMF-JICA conference on Economic and Fiscal Policy Challenges and Prospects for Asia. And this is scheduled for February 12 and 13.

    And with that I will now open the floor for your questions. For those connecting virtually, please do turn on both your camera and the microphone when speaking. Let’s get started.

    QUESTIONER: Hi,I was just wondering, you mentioned Ethiopia. How concerned are you about sort of countries with large IMF programs which also receive a substantial amount of support from USAID, considering the recent executive order, countries like Ethiopia and Ukraine, for example. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Thanks very much. So with respect to your question, you know we are closely following the announcements and developments regarding USAID. At this stage it’s too early to gauge the precise impact on the countries that it supports. We’ll wait for clarity on the next steps, including any changes to the scope of the work of USAID.

    QUESTIONER: So, the IMF mission is going to start working in Ukraine this month. Could you specify please what main issues will the Fund plan to focus on during the Seventh Review of the EFF program. And the second question is about the pension reform in Ukraine. Ukrainian government committed to starting this reform this year. Could you elaborate on what key changes the IMF expects from Ukraine on this area? Thank you.

    KOZACK: Are there any other questions on Ukraine?

    QUESTIONER: So, according to latest information, the review of the EFF is scheduled to begin this month. When the decision on the disbursement is going to be made and what amount of funds are going to be provided with this fund? And the follow-up, how much money is left in the EFF according to the current situation? Are there any plans to expand this program? Thank you.

    QUESTIONER: Just to follow up on the question about Ethiopia. Obviously, the USAID cuts also affect Ukraine pretty significantly. And I wonder, you know, both in those cases and in all cases involving USAID funding, whether you are working with the US ED here and sort of sending a message about the impact. So, whether you’ve kind of figured it out across the enterprise and across all the countries that the IMF works with as well. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Anything else on Ukraine online? Okay. So, on Ukraine, just to remind everyone of the context. So, on December 20th, the IMF’s Executive Board approved the Sixth Review of the EFF program. That enabled the disbursement of $1.1 billion and that brought total disbursements under the program to $9.8 billion. And the total size of the program, I believe, was $15.6 billion. So, the difference between those two is what would be remaining. At that time, the Board assessed that program performance remained strong. The authorities had met all of the benchmarks and prior actions for the review.

    With respect to the next mission, the technical work for the upcoming review is underway. The mission dates are in the process of being finalized, and once we have them, we’ll be sure to communicate that. During this upcoming mission, the IMF staff will engage with the authorities on fiscal policy, including progress on revenue mobilization, monetary policies for 2025, and also progress in ensuring that debt sustainability and fiscal sustainability are restored. Staff will also be reviewing governance reforms, which remain a key pillar for the program. Based on the approved calendar of disbursements, subject to completion of the next review and, of course, subject to Board approval, Ukraine would have access to about $900 million for that next review.

    With respect to pension reform, the government has committed to launch pension reforms this year in 2025, and they would be spearheaded by the Ministry of Social Policy. And those reforms are supported by external partners, notably the World Bank. What I can also add is that the authorities are in the process of developing a comprehensive set of proposals for pension reforms, but it’s too early to tell exactly what will be included in those proposals and what the changes may be.

    And on the second question, I don’t really have much to add to what I already said, other than obviously we’re paying close attention and we’re awaiting further details.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Just on Syria, can you give us an update if the IMF has made any contact with the new government and if there are any plans to provide a loan package to the country? Thank you.

    KOZACK: We’re closely monitoring, obviously, the situation in Syria, and we stand ready to support the international community’s efforts to assist Syria’s reconstruction as needed and when conditions allow. With respect to our engagement, we have not had a meaningful engagement with Syria since 2009, which was the time of the last Article IV Consultation, and this has been due to the difficult security situation in the country.

    QUESTIONER: I have two questions, and they’re Caribbean-related questions. Can you provide a breakdown of the growth projections for the Caribbean region, more specifically, focusing on St. Kitts and Nevis, and what factors are driving the projected growth or decline outlook for the region, more specifically, the Caribbean region?

    KOZACK: Okay. All right, let me step back and give a little bit of an overview of where we stand, what our view is on the Caribbean. So, following the rapid recovery after the Pandemic, real GDP growth in the region has normalized in recent years. Average GDP growth for the region, and this is excluding Guyana and Haiti, is estimated at 2.2 percent for 2023, 2.4 percent for 2024. And growth, our projection is for growth to remain relatively stable at 2.4 percent in 2025.

    Broadly speaking, there are sort of two groups of countries in the Caribbean. So, we look at tourism-dependent economies, and there we see that growth in tourism economies has slowed as tourism arrivals have returned to pre-Pandemic levels. And then for commodity-exporting countries, they have faced challenges in the energy sector but have overall benefited from robust performance in their non-energy sector, and that has been driven by supportive and economic policies.

    I can also add that inflation in most Caribbean countries has moderated significantly over the past few years, and the decline was due to lower global commodity prices and easing of supply chain disruptions. And we expect inflation to remain moderate in the years to come.

    QUESTIONER: My question is on the comment by Managing Director Georgieva in Davos. MD mentioned in Davos clearly that more cooperation in the regional levels might be needed in the future in such a fragmented world and IMF would support such a movement. And could you give me some more detailed plans?

    KOZACK: Thanks very much for the question. What the Managing Director noted in Davos is that we are seeing shifting patterns in global cooperation, in trade, and in other areas, including financial and capital flows. And of course, as a global institution, what will be important for us is as we engage with our membership, right, to take all of this into account to ensure that we can give our members the best policy advice within our mandate of economic and financial stability.

    QUESTIONER: Thanks so much, Julie. I wanted to ask you very broadly about the changes that are happening in the United States and the tariffs that President Trump has announced. Now the implementation of the tariffs on Canada and Mexico has been delayed to March 1st. And, you know, it’s not clear what will happen there exactly. But one of the, you know, the tariffs on China have stayed in place. China has now announced tariffs that will kick in on February 10th. The IMF has warned repeatedly against rising protectionism and also kind of cataloged the thousands of trade restrictions that have been put in place and growing over time since COVID. Can you just walk us through what your perception is right now? The markets have been really all over the place, you know, sort of up and down depending on the day’s mood. Do you see this period of trade uncertainty that you warned about in the WEO, kind of really affecting and dampening global growth prospects? Thanks.

    KOZACK: Thanks very much. Let me see if anyone else has questions on this broad topic.

    QUESTIONER: Thank you. Yeah, I was just wondering, just to follow on the previous question, how you sort of think about the unpredictability of of these tariffs or the discussions around the tariffs, the uncertainty that that kind of brings up, and potentially how that could affect monetary policy. We’ve seen a lot of analysts talking about how they no longer expect the Fed to cut, or they expect the Fed to cut maybe only once this year. I’m just sort of wondering how you’re kind of in real time or as close to real time as you can, sort of taking on board that unpredictability when you think about the U.S. economy and the impacts for global growth. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Great. And you also had a question.

    QUESTIONER: Yes. Just following up with my colleagues. What sort of study, if any, has the IMF undertaken to better understand the global ramifications of these tariffs? We know they’re on pause for another 30 days or so or less. And what sort of impact would small states that are heavily dependent on the United States feel going forward?

    KOZACK: And let me go online to see if anyone online has a question along these lines.

    QUESTIONER: It is very similar. Just wondering the fact that it’s not just tariffs that have imposed on China, but the threat of tariffs on countries across the EU, Canada, and Mexico, and what effect that has on the global outlook. Thank you.

    KOZACK: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else online want to come in on this topic? Okay. So, what I can say on this issue is we’re following the announcements by the U.S. with respect to tariffs on Chinese goods and potentially Canadian and Mexican goods. We’re following these announcements. We believe that it’s in the interest of all to find a constructive way forward to resolve this issue.

    With respect to the assessment, assessing the full impact of these measures of tariffs, it’s actually going to depend on several factors, and let me lay those out. One of those factors is going to be the responses of the countries concerned. Another factor will be how firms and consumers react. And finally, how the measures evolve over time will also have an impact.

    So, at this stage, that’s what I can share with you. We will, of course, have more information over time and in due course as the situation evolves.

    QUESTIONER: Julie, I’m sorry, I think the question is, like, can you say something about what uncertainty does to the global economy? I mean, you’ve talked about this in WEO’s before, but do you see this as a period of heightened uncertainty now that Trump has taken office? And, you know, what is the impact of that uncertainty on things like investment and all this, you know, the sort of categories of economic indicators that we look at?

    KOZACK: So, I think what I can say is, of course, I would refer you to the WEO for some of those analysis. And again, assessing the full impact of this will include all of the factors that I just laid out. And we would take into account issues related to uncertainty, market reactions, et cetera, in an assessment that we will ultimately undertake as the situation evolves and once we have more information.

    Let me now go online. I see a couple of hands up. So, if you’re online, please go ahead and jump in.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Well, has the letter of intent between the IMF and Argentina been prepared? Or let me ask in a different way. Are the negotiations between Argentina and the IMF already in the final stage?

    KOZACK: Thanks. Other questions on Argentina?

    QUESTIONER: Could you give me any updates on the negotiations of the new agreement and what are the most challenging issues they are facing right now? And also yesterday, Minister Luis Caputo said a new agreement will not imply a devaluation of the peso or the exit of the exchange restrictions the next day. Does the IMF agree with this statement?

    KOZACK: Thanks. Others on Argentina?

    QUESTIONER: Hi, Julie. I was wondering also if you could give some input regarding the meetings that the mission in Buenos Aires had, if they have only been talking to government officials or if they are also contacting unions and other opposition representatives. And also, the new crawling peg of 1 percent has started this February. I was wondering if that was a matter of discussion between the staff and the government.

    KOZACK: Thanks, other questions?

    QUESTIONER: Yes, thank you, Julie. So, my question is also on the crawling peg. So, is the IMF concerned about the greater exchange rate delay generated by this reduction of the crawling peg from 2 percent to 1 percent started the 1st of February?

    KOZACK: Any other questions on Argentina? Okay, I hear two more. Please go ahead.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, Julie, I wanted to know if Argentina has already paid a debt due on February 1st or when is it expected to do so? And if there is a meeting plan between Argentina authorities and the IMF network staff in Washington.

    KOZACK: Thank you. Next.

    QUESTIONER: Good morning. The question is if Argentina and the IMF comes to a new agreement, should it be like we are talking here in Argentina about $5 million? It will be for anything special, for example, to leave what we call cepo, or it depends on the Argentine authorities.

    KOZACK: Any other questions on Argentina? Okay, I do not see anyone coming in.

    So, on Argentina, what I can share is first that, as the Managing Director highlighted after her meeting with President Milei last month, we recognize Argentina’s tremendous progress in reducing inflation, stabilizing the economy, returning to growth, and with poverty finally starting to decline. We continue to engage constructively with the Argentine authorities. And a staff mission did recently visit Buenos Aires to advance discussions on a new program. The new program will aim to build on the gains that have been achieved so far, while also addressing the remaining challenges that the country faces. Constructive and frequent discussions continue, and we will provide further details on next steps when we have them.

    I can also just add that to sustain early gains, there is a shared recognition between the Fund staff and the Argentine authorities about the need to continue to adopt a consistent set of fiscal, monetary, and foreign exchange policies while furthering growth-enhancing reforms. I also know that you have a lot of interest, and there were a lot of detailed questions here, but given that the discussions are continuing and there has been good progress so far, we do want to ensure that there is space for staff and the authorities to continue these constructive discussions. And of course, we will communicate more when we have further details.

    Okay, let us go online because I see a few hands up.

    QUESTIONER: My question is, when do we expect Board of Directors to discuss Egypt Fourth Review?

    KOZACK: Do we have other questions on Egypt?

    QUESTIONER: Hi, I’d like to ask, in addition to that, when the board does discuss Egypt’s Fourth Review, will it also be discussing an additional RSF for Egypt? There have been some reports that Egypt is in line to receive as much as $1 billion.

    KOZACK: Other questions?

    QUESTIONER:  I just wanted to ask, in terms of the assessment of Egypt, but also other countries in the region, to what extent you are calculating additional costs and spending needs that have to do with Gaza and with the potential absorption of Palestinian refugees that has been proposed.

    KOZACK: Okay, any other questions on Egypt? I see I have two questions that have come through the press center, which I will read aloud. So, the first is when will the IMF’s Executive Board complete the Fourth Review of the Extended Arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility for Egypt?

    The second question is regarding the Executive Board’s approval of the Fourth Review of Egypt’s program, could it be this month? Does the IMF have updates on your projections for Egypt’s economy in light of regional updates?

    Let me share with you where we are on Egypt. On December 24, the IMF staff and the Egyptian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Fourth Review of the EFF. This review is subject to approval of our Executive Board and subject to that approval, Egypt would have access to about $1.2 billion. Preparations for Board consideration are underway, and the Board meeting is expected to take place in the coming weeks.

    In light of the difficult external conditions and challenging domestic environment, the IMF staff and the Egyptian authorities agreed to recalibrate the fiscal consolidation path, and this was agreed in December, I would highlight, to create fiscal space for critical social programs benefiting vulnerable groups and the middle class while ensuring debt sustainability.

    Looking forward, reform priorities comprise lowering inflation, sustaining exchange rate flexibility, and liberalized access to foreign exchange. In addition, the program aims to boost domestic revenues. It aims to improve the business environment. It aims to accelerate disinvestment or divestment rather and leveling [of] the playing field between state-owned enterprises and the private sector. And of course, it also aims to enhance governance and transparency.

    With respect to the question on the RSF, a policy package of reforms will be considered by the Fund’s Executive Board along with the Fourth Review of Egypt’s program.

    And lastly, there is no connection at the moment between some of the announcements in Gaza and the and the Egypt program.

    QUESTIONER: Hi, I wonder if I can just clarify. On the RSF, you say a policy package of reforms that also presumably comes with some additional funding. Can you confirm whether the amount of up to $1 billion is accurate?

    KOZACK: I can’t confirm now the precise amount of the RSF, but of course as we have more information, we will provide that.

    QUESTIONER: Thank you so much.

    KOZACK: Let us go online. I see another hand online and then we will come back. Just one follow up, a follow up. Go ahead.

    QUESTIONER: You cannot confirm the amount of the RSF. So just so we are clear, are you confirming that there are discussions around an RSF? Thanks.

    KOZACK: Yes, there’s discussions on an RSF and the intention is to present the RSF with its package of reforms to our Executive Board at the same time as we present the Fourth Review of the EFF.

    QUESTIONER: Question about Rwanda and Eastern Congo. I wanted to know, I know that the IMF has programs with both Rwanda and the DRC. And I wanted to know, you know, given the M23 incursion, the fall of Goma, how the programs can react to it, if there is anything you can say about that. And also, obviously, in El Salvador, they changed their cryptocurrency law, but it is also reported that they recently bought 50 bitcoins. So, some people are for the kind of national treasury. Some people are confused in terms of what the contours of the limitations put on. And I wonder if you could comment on that. Thanks a lot.

    KOZACK: Okay, thank you. Any other questions on these countries? DRC, Rwanda, El Salvador?

    Okay, let me start with DRC and I want to start by saying that, you know, we are deeply saddened by the loss of lives and the humanitarian crisis in the Eastern part of DRC. We are closely monitoring the situation, including its potential impact on neighboring countries and the region. And of course, we are also closely monitoring with respect to potential impact on our program.

    With respect to Rwanda, what I can say on Rwanda is simply that the country continues to demonstrate a robust commitment to advancing policy reforms. And In December of 2024, our Executive Board concluded the Fourth Review of Rwanda’s programs.

    With respect to El Salvador, just to step back and remind, IMF staff and the Salvadorian authorities reached a staff-level agreement on December 18th for a new arrangement, a new EFF arrangement. The arrangement would be for about $1.4 billion to support the government’s reform agenda, and this agreement is subject to approval by the IMF’s Executive Board.

    I can also add that as explained in the press release that we issued following the staff-level agreement, the new Fund supported program aims to reduce the potential risks of the bitcoin project. Once in place, purchases of bitcoin will be confined under the program as agreed.

    QUESTIONER: Thank you, Julie. Good morning, everyone. A few things. In Zimbabwe, when you expect a deal for the Staff Monitored Program? And on Lebanon, have you had any contact with the new government? Are there any signs that you are going to be able to work with them? Also on Senegal, can you give us any update on the resolution of the suspension of the financing program there? And lastly, are there any concerns of a drop in the commitment of funding from the U.S.? The 2025 project calls for the U.S. to stop putting money into the World Bank and the IMF. So, are you guys concerned about that?

    KOZACK: Okay, thanks. Starting with Zimbabwe, I do not have an update for you for today on Zimbabwe, but we will come back to you bilaterally.

    On Lebanon, what I can share is that, you know, we welcome the election of General Aoun as president of Lebanon, and we look forward to working with him and his new government to address the challenges facing the Lebanese economy. And just to remind, Lebanon continues to face profound economic challenges, and the conflict had exacerbated an already fragile macroeconomic and social situation. The election of the president, the formation of a new government, as well as the ceasefire, are critical to support policy actions and reforms that would allow the gradual return to the normalization of economic activity in Lebanon.

    And what I can share on Senegal is that we are actively engaged in discussions with the authorities on addressing the misreporting case. Senegal’s Court of Auditors is expected to issue its final report this month. In parallel, IMF staff are working closely with the authorities to identify their capacity development needs and to implement corrective measures needed to address the root causes of the misreporting. These efforts are aimed at enhancing transparency, strengthening accountability, and preventing a recurrence of similar misreporting in the future.

    And I think, on your final question, all I can say here is that the United States is the IMF’s largest shareholder, and it plays an extremely valuable role in helping ensure global financial stability. We have a long history of working with successive U.S. administrations, and we look forward to continuing to do so.

    QUESTIONER: Thanks, Julie. Thank you for taking my question. When do you think we can expect the Executive Board’s approval on the next tranche for the Island Nation? And if there is any delay, what sort of reason is there? Is there more for the government to do? And secondly, the budget for the country is expected in a few weeks. Has the IMF given any input on preparing this budget, given the fact that the country is still in the EFF program?

    KOZACK: Thanks. So, your question was on Sri Lanka? And yes, I see you nodding. So, if anyone else has questions on Sri Lanka, I can take them now. Okay. If not, let me go ahead with Sri Lanka.

    So, on Sri Lanka on November 23rd, IMF staff and the Sri Lankan authorities reached a staff-level agreement on the Third Review of Sri Lanka’s EFF program. Once approved by the IMF’s Executive Board, Sri Lanka will have access to about $333 million in financing. And we expect the Board meeting to take place in the coming weeks.

    Here, I would also just like to take the opportunity to emphasize that Sri Lanka’s ambitious reform agenda is delivering commendable outcomes. The economy expanded by 5.5 percent in the fourth — third quarter of 2024. Average headline and core inflation remain contained well below the target during the fourth quarter of 2024. And international reserves increased to $6.1 billion at the end of 2024.

    With respect to the specific question on the budget, what I can share is that the staff-level agreement that I mentioned, which was reached in November, will be presented to the Executive Board or is subject to Executive Board approval, but it’s also contingent upon, among other things, implementation by the authorities of prior actions, including submission of the 2025 budget that is consistent with parameters identified under the program.

    QUESTIONER: Most of the questions we had have been touched upon, and I would just reinforce as well what colleagues had said earlier about trying to get a sense of what all this uncertainty around tariffs will mean. I know there is a tendency to talk about the policies once they are implemented and the impact. But given the fact that policies get announced and withdrawn and swung around, it seems like the uncertainty has more of the impact than the actual policy. But all that seems to be covered. I will get to — actually, the only outstanding question we have now is if you could update us on the status of the Mozambique program and if there is a risk to that program’s existence right now, given what is going on. That is for our Africa colleagues. Everything else was covered. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

    1. KOZACK: Thank you very much. So, on Mozambique, what I can share is that the Article IV Consultation and the Fourth Review of the Extended Credit Facility, or ECF, were completed back in July of 2024. An IMF team will visit Maputo in the coming weeks to engage with the new government. We do remain engaged to support the country’s efforts toward remaining macroeconomic stability, accelerating growth and making growth more inclusive, in line with the arrangements. But given that there is a mission in the coming weeks, we will have more to report toward the end of that engagement.

    QUESTIONER: Julie, regarding Russia, are there any developments concerning the postponed mission to Russia to evaluate progress in economy that was stopped in September due to necessity to gather additional information and make additional analysis. Anything we should expect this year, probably? Thank you.

    KOZACK: Unfortunately, I don’t yet have an update for you or a timeline for the Article IV.

    QUESTIONER: One final question. Thank you. Sorry, Julie, I’m going to try again with a sort of a similar question. But, you know, we are seeing a fundamental shift in the global and potentially in the support that is available for developing countries. The United States has ended foreign assistance. It has frozen funding for the World Food Program. It is pulling out of and talking about pulling out of the World Health Organization. These are institutions that are part, writ large, of the Bretton Woods system in which the IMF is such a key player.

    So, I do not think it’s unfair of us to be asking for some guidance from you about how you at an institution like the IMF are approaching this period of time that is marked by uncertainty, not just for the markets or for global trade, but also for the institutions themselves. And, you know, we have seen some initial reports that Elon Musk’s DOGE employees or people who work with DOGE are starting to look at the World Bank and other institutions.

    And I, you know, so I guess we want to hear something from you that is a little bit broader about the time that we’re in and what it means, because it obviously has implications for other countries, too, if they’re going to fill the gap in the developing thing. And, you know, you have been warning for years that the developing economies face a kind of perfect storm of different difficult circumstances. This seems like it adds to, to it. Thanks.

    KOZACK: Thanks very much. Look, what I can say now is really what I’ve been saying. I really do not have much to add other than that we are a global institution. We have a clearly defined mandate to support economic and financial stability globally and just ultimately support growth and employment in the world economy. We are continuing as an institution to remain laser-focused, of course, on that mandate. And we, as a global institution, take our responsibility to serve our membership very, very seriously. And we will continue to do everything that we need to do to serve our membership in the best possible way. You know, we do, as I said, have a long history of working with successive U.S. administrations, and we look forward to continuing to do so as an institution for which the U.S. is our largest shareholder.

    And with this, I’m going to bring this press briefing to an end. Thank you all for your participation today. As a reminder, this briefing is embargoed until 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time today. A transcript will be made available later on IMF.org, and as usual, in case of clarifications, additional queries, or anything else, please reach out to my colleagues at media@mf.org.

    This does conclude our first press briefing of the year. I wish everyone a wonderful day and I do look forward to seeing you next time. Thank you all so much for joining, and please be safe given the weather outside here in D.C. Thank you, everyone.

    * * * * *

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER:

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

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/02/06/020625-tr-imf-press-briefing-julie-kozack

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Gaza and West Bank – “Inflicting harm and denying care” in the West Bank: MSF report on escalation of attacks and obstructions of healthcare

    Source: Medecins Sans Frontieres/Doctors Without Borders (MSF)

    Jerusalem, 6 February 2025 – Israeli forces and settlers have increased the use of extreme physical violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank since the all-out war on Gaza began in October 2023, according to a new report by Medecins Sans Frontieres/Doctors Without Borders (MSF). 

    In total, at least 870 Palestinians have been killed and over 7,100 injured between October 2023 and January 20251. According to the MSF report, “Inflicting harm and denying care”, the escalation of violence in the West Bank has severely hindered access to healthcare and is part of a pattern of systemic oppression by Israel which has been described by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as amounting to racial segregation and apartheid.

    The report which covers a one-year period from October 2023 and 2024, provides in-depth interviews from 38 MSF patients and personnel, hospital staff paramedics and volunteers supported by MSF who report prolonged and violent Israeli military incursions and stricter movement restrictions, all of which have severely hindered access to essential services, particularly healthcare. The situation has further deteriorated since the ceasefire in Gaza and has exacerbated dire living conditions for many Palestinians who are paying an immense physical and psychological toll.

    “Palestinian patients are dying because they simply cannot reach hospitals,” says Brice de le Vingne, MSF emergency coordinator. “We’re seeing ambulances blocked by Israeli forces at checkpoints while carrying critical patients, medical facilities surrounded and raided during active operations, and healthcare workers subjected to physical violence while trying to save lives.”

    An increased number of attacks on medical personnel and facilities have been reported to MSF teams, including attacks on hospitals, destruction of makeshift medical sites in refugee camps, as well as the harassment, detention, injury, and killing of first responders and medical workers by Israeli forces. Between October 2023 and December 2024, WHO has recorded 694 attacks on healthcare in the West Bank, with hospitals and healthcare structures often besieged by military force. Healthcare workers express a feeling of insecurity as they are frequently harassed, detained, injured and even killed.

    “Israeli forces surrounded the stabilisation point [in Tubas], closing both its entrances, even though it was very clear that this was a medical building. They ordered all the paramedics to exit the stabilisation point. There were around 22 of us paramedics there. Israeli soldiers shot inside and outside the building, damaging our supplies and the stabilisation point,” says a medic from the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, supported by MSF.

    In case of medical emergency, restrictions of movement can have deadly consequences. Access to healthcare in this context has been severely impeded by the obstruction and targeting of ambulance movements and the escalation of violent military raids resulting in injuries, fatalities and the destruction of vital civilian infrastructure, including roads, healthcare, water pipelines and electrical systems, particularly in Tulkarem and Jenin refugee camps. In remote areas and outskirts of cities like Jenin or Nablus, the situation is especially dire, as patients with chronic conditions, such as

    those who need regular dialysis treatment, are forced to stay home due to the untenable obstacles to reaching healthcare.

    On top of the frequent Israeli military incursions, settler violence and the ever-increasing expansion of settlements has left many Palestinians vulnerable to violence and afraid to move across the West Bank. In total, 1,500 attacks by Israeli settlers against Palestinians have been reported by OCHA between October 2023 and 2024.

    As the occupying power, Israel has legal obligations under international law to ensure access to healthcare and protect medical personnel. The healthcare system in the West Bank is under immense strain and forced into a state of perpetual emergency.

    MSF calls Israel to stop the violence against healthcare workers, patients and health facilities and to stop obstructing medical personnel from performing lifesaving duties.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: OPEC Fund arranges US$50 million syndicated loan facility to promote access to finance for SMEs in Paraguay

    Source: OPEC Fund for International Development (the OPEC Fund)

    February 6, 2025: The OPEC Fund for International Development (the OPEC Fund) has arranged a syndicated loan with a US$50 million facility for the benefit of Banco Continental in Paraguay. While the OPEC Fund will contribute US$25 million from its own resources as A-lender, it has also mobilized a US$25 million B-loan from Commercial Bank of Dubai. The OPEC Fund acted as sole Bookrunner, Mandated Lead Arranger and Facility Agent.

    The funding will support Banco Continental’s efforts to expand lending to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and to support the agricultural sector in Paraguay by driving economic growth and bolstering food security through the provision of finance.

    The successful syndication marks a milestone in the OPEC Fund’s mission to mobilize financing for the development needs of partner countries: CBD is one of the largest banks in the UAE, one of the OPEC Fund member countries, and the financing represents its first operation in Paraguay.

    OPEC Fund President Abdulhamid Alkhalifa said: “This syndication reflects the OPEC Fund’s ability to mobilize resources for impactful development and create opportunities for economic growth. Partnering with CBD and Banco Continental we are channeling resources from our member country UAE to initiatives that directly support SMEs and the agricultural sector – key pillars of sustainable growth and food security in Paraguay. This transaction also demonstrates the strength of cross-border collaboration in addressing global development needs.”

    Banco Continental CEO Juan Carlos Carranza said: “We are proud to have successfully completed this transaction with the OPEC Fund and Commercial Bank of Dubai. At Continental, we are leaders in providing financial assistance to the most productive sectors of Paraguay with a strategic vision and social inclusion, meeting the various needs of our clients. Recently, with the investment grade rating, we have strengthened our ability to offer innovative, solid, and competitive solutions, contributing to the economic development of the country and consolidating our market position.”

    Fahad Al Muhairi, General Manager for Institutional Banking at Commercial Bank of Dubai stated: “We are pleased to partner with the OPEC Fund to participate in this facility. At CBD, we are committed to advancing sustainable finance while expanding our global footprint. Our partnership with the OPEC Fund exemplifies our strategy to collaborate with leading international institutions to support economic growth in emerging markets and underscores our commitment to building strategic alliances that drive responsible banking.”

    About the OPEC Fund

    The OPEC Fund for International Development (the OPEC Fund) is the only globally mandated development institution that provides financing from member countries to non-member countries exclusively. The organization works in cooperation with developing country partners and the international development community to stimulate economic growth and social progress in low- and middle-income countries around the world. The OPEC Fund was established in 1976 with a distinct purpose: to drive development, strengthen communities and empower people. Our work is people-centered, focusing on financing projects that meet essential needs, such as food, energy, infrastructure, employment (particularly relating to MSMEs), clean water and sanitation, healthcare and education. To date, the OPEC Fund has committed more than US$29 billion to development projects in over 125 countries with an estimated total project cost of about US$225 billion. The OPEC Fund is rated AA+ (Stable Outlook) by Fitch and S&P. Our vision is a world where sustainable development is a reality for all.

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Structural change, supply shocks and hard choices

    Source: Bank of Canada

    Good afternoon. I’m pleased to be able to join you virtually to talk about the challenges that lie ahead for central banks. There’s a lot to discuss.

    But my first order of business is to congratulate and thank Agustín Carstens for his leadership as General Manager of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). Your term, Agustín, has been marked by significant global upheaval—from pandemic shutdowns to war in Europe and double-digit inflation. These past few years have not been easy.

    Through it all, you have been a source of unwavering wisdom. Your clear thinking in the face of the unknown, your long view and your deep understanding of our global interdependence—all combined with the experience and pragmatism of a former minister of finance and then central bank governor—have made you an invaluable leader.

    More than that, through the BIS, you’ve brought us together with your friendship and your ability to get directly to the heart of the issue. You’ve helped us learn from each other. And you’ve made us better together.

    I know there will be an opportunity to celebrate you in Basel as your retirement in June approaches. But I wanted to recognize your exceptional leadership in your home country. For those of us in the Americas, your special interest in our region has been deeply appreciated. Whatever you do next, I know Mexico and the Americas will be an important part. Thank you, my friend.

    Now, let me turn to the challenges ahead. We are facing a global economic landscape that has shifted in recent years, and this shift has important implications for central banks.

    As Agustín has highlighted in a series of insightful speeches, the structural tailwinds of peace, globalization and demographics are turning into headwinds—and the world looks increasingly shock-prone.

    Higher long-term interest rates, elevated sovereign debt, slower economic growth and lagging productivity make all of our economies more vulnerable. Compounding these vulnerabilities are war, rising trade protectionism and economic fragmentation. In addition, new technologies—including artificial intelligence—are set to disrupt existing industries and create new ones. And we are seeing more frequent catastrophic weather events as the impacts of climate change become more pervasive.

    As 2025 begins, we are facing new uncertainty with a shift in policy direction in the United States. President Donald Trump’s threats of new tariffs are already affecting business and household confidence, particularly in Canada and Mexico. The longer this uncertainty persists, the more it will weigh on economic activity in our countries.

    If significant broad-based tariffs are indeed imposed, they will test the resilience of our economies in the short run and reduce long-run prosperity. Tariffs mean economies work less efficiently. There will be less investment and lower productivity. That means our countries will produce less and earn less. Monetary policy can’t change that.

    What monetary policy can do is help with the short-run adjustment. But even here, monetary policy has to strike a balance. Significant, broad-based tariffs will sharply reduce demand for our exports. At the same time, a weaker exchange rate, retaliatory tariffs and supply chain disruptions will raise import prices, putting upward pressure on inflation.   

    With a single instrument—our policy interest rate—central banks can’t lean against weaker output and higher inflation at the same time. So we will need to carefully assess the downward pressure on inflation from weaker economic activity, and weigh that against the upward pressures from higher input prices and supply chain disruptions.

    Other structural headwinds pose similar challenges for monetary policy. They’ll impact both demand and supply, slowing growth while adding cost. Monetary policy cannot address these headwinds directly or offset their economic consequences.

    In a world with more structural change and more negative supply shocks, central banks will be faced with harder choices. And harder choices bring risks of public disappointment and frustration. We will face criticism about our decisions—and about how well monetary policy is seen to have worked when confronted with forces that are mostly out of our hands. We will be called ineffective or criticized for not doing enough. And some will challenge our independence.

    So, what can all of us do?

    First, we can be humble about what we don’t know, but also confident in the effectiveness of our frameworks. We didn’t get everything right through the pandemic. And elevated inflation and higher interest rates have been difficult for our citizens. But in Canada, as in many other countries, inflation has come down. And we restored low inflation without causing a recession or major job losses.

    Guided by our frameworks, we can maintain confidence in price stability.

    Second, we can be just as clear about what monetary policy cannot do. There will always be forces beyond our influence, and while we need to understand those forces, we should also be clear that understanding is not the same as controlling. And we need to avoid the temptation to overload monetary policy by expecting more of it than it can deliver.

    Third, we can recognize that the world has changed. Structural headwinds and supply shocks require different types of information and analysis. This means investing in richer information about the supply side of the economy and building models that can analyze sectoral shocks and their transmission. It means reaching out and listening to households and businesses. It means looking at our economies through different lenses, regularly challenging our assumptions, and using scenarios to help manage uncertainty.

    Fourth, let’s acknowledge that working together has never been easy and it’s getting harder. But let’s also remember that it’s important. We are more effective if we confront our shared challenges together. The shared resolve of central banks to fight the post-pandemic surge in inflation helped all of us bring inflation down. This was a positive international spillover and, together, we can generate other positive international spillovers.

    Finally, we need to remain evidence-based, technocratic and professional, and free of political influence. We need to be open, accountable and transparent. And we need to be learning institutions—when faced with valid criticism, we should critically evaluate our policy actions and be willing to improve. Being independent and accountable and continuously learning is how we build trust.

    The world is a tougher place today than it was a few short years ago. And facing the headwinds before us will not be easy. But that’s why we have independent central banks—we are designed for tough times.

    I look forward to hearing from my esteemed colleagues on this panel.

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Gaza: UN health agency urges rapid scale-up of medevacs as thousands remain in critical condition

    Source: United Nations 4

    Peace and Security

    More than 12,000 critically ill and injured patients, including at least 5,000 children, urgently need to be evacuated from Gaza, amid the crumbling health system, the UN World Health Organization (WHO)’s top official in the region said on Thursday.

    Speaking from Gaza, WHO Representative Rik Peeperkorn described a scene of widespread destruction, overwhelmed medical facilities and growing mental health needs, as the population in the enclave gradually returns to what is left of their homes after nearly 16 months of conflict.

    “Everyone in Gaza is affected…stress, anxiety, depression, and loneliness. It’s everywhere,” he said, highlighting the psychological toll on both residents and health workers.

    WHO Representative Peeperkorn speaking to the press via video link.

    Hospitals barely operational

    Before the war, Gaza had more than 3,500 hospital beds. Today, only 1,900 remain, and very few intensive care units (ICUs) and incubators for newborns, leaving medical staff struggling to treat critical cases.

    Even before the war, mental health services were limited, with just one psychiatric hospital, six community centres, and an NGO network providing support. Now, those facilities are either destroyed or non-functional.

    The situation is particularly concerning in northern Gaza, where only two psychiatrists remain. In addition, only one hospital remains partly functional in the region, and the remaining either destroyed or severely damaged.

    “Jabalya is like a wasteland. The destruction…is beyond belief,” he added.

    Evacuations painfully slow

    Dr. Peeperkorn further stated that medical evacuations of critically ill and injured patients have begun, with 35 to 40 patients transferred daily.

    “It is incredibly important that we expedite this and speed this up,” he said, emphasising that, according to WHO estimates, between 12,000 to 14,000 patients need to be evacuated from Gaza, including at least 5,000 children.

    Among the total estimated patients, about half suffer from trauma-related injuries while others need urgent treatment for chronic conditions such as cancer and cardiovascular disease.

    Dr. Peeperkorn called for the urgent re-opening of additional medical corridors, especially the “traditional referral pathway” of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, where facilities are ready to receive patients.

    UN News

    Critical infrastructure, including electricity networks, has suffered extensive damage across the Gaza Strip.

    Wider humanitarian situation

    Beyond the dire health crisis, the broader humanitarian situation in Gaza remains critical, with severe shortages of clean water, food, and essential services.

    UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher visited the enclave on Thursday, as UN agencies and partners continue responding to immense needs, a UN spokesperson said.

    “In northern Gaza, Mr. Fletcher toured two hospitals – Al Shifa in Gaza City and Al Awda in Jabalya – where he met with patients, staff and management,” Farhan Haq, Deputy UN Spokesperson, told journalists at a news briefing in New York.

    “Leaving the Al Awda hospital, he spoke with survivors and returnees in Jabalya who are trying to rebuild their lives amid the rubble.”

    Acute shortages

    Mr. Haq further reported that water shortages remain particularly acute.  The only operational water well in north Gaza, run by the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), serves as a crucial lifeline for clean drinking water.

    However, widespread infrastructure destruction has left many residents without reliable access. Humanitarian partners are distributing 2,500 cubic metres of safe drinking water daily, reaching about 411,000 people, but this remains far below the actual needs.

    A partner organization is also providing cleaning and sanitation services at 17 displacement sites in northern Gaza, benefiting nearly 12,000 displaced individuals.

    “Water, sanitation and hygiene partners are carrying out assessments in locations across the Strip to repair water wells, install dosing pumps, and set up water filling points,” Mr. Haq said, adding: “while some repairs are already underway, further progress hinges on teams being able to clear debris and carry out assessments of explosive hazards.”

    Challenges in the West Bank

    Meanwhile in the West Bank, Israeli military operations have intensified in Jenin, Tulkarm, and Tubas, severely restricting Palestinian access to essential aid, including water, food, medicine and supplies for infants.

    In Tubas governorate, Israeli forces have been operating in the El Far’a refugee camp for five consecutive days, Mr. Haq reported.

    “They have imposed a curfew, reportedly prohibiting residents from leaving their homes. They also bulldozed roads and damaged water networks, forcing residents to rely on collecting rainwater.”

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

  • MIL-OSI: Southside Bancshares, Inc. Declares Cash Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TYLER, Texas, Feb. 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Board of Directors of Southside Bancshares, Inc., (NYSE:SBSI), parent company of Southside Bank, declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.36 per common share. The cash dividend of $0.36 is scheduled for payment on March 6, 2025, to common stock shareholders of record on February 20, 2025.

    About Southside Bancshares, Inc.

    Southside Bancshares, Inc. is a bank holding company headquartered in Tyler, Texas, with approximately $8.52 billion in assets as of December 31, 2024, that wholly-owns Southside Bank. Southside Bank currently operates 53 branches and a network of 72 ATMs/ITMs throughout East Texas, Southeast Texas and the greater Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin and Houston areas. Serving customers since 1960, Southside Bank is a community-focused financial institution that offers a full range of financial products and services to individuals and businesses. These products and services include consumer and commercial loans, mortgages, deposit accounts, safe deposit boxes, treasury management, wealth management, trust services, brokerage services and an array of online and mobile services.

    To learn more about Southside Bancshares, Inc., please visit our investor relations website at https://investors.southside.com. Our investor relations site provides a detailed overview of our activities, financial information and historical stock price data. To receive email notification of company news, events and stock activity, please register on the website under Resources and Investor Email Alerts. Questions or comments may be directed to Lindsey Bailes at (903) 630-7965, or lindsey.bailes@southside.com.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Northeast Bank Reports Second Quarter Results and Declares Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PORTLAND, Maine, Feb. 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Northeast Bank (the “Bank”) (NASDAQ: NBN), a Maine-based full-service bank, today reported net income of $22.4 million, or $2.74 per diluted common share, for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to net income of $14.1 million, or $1.85 per diluted common share, for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. Net income for the six months ended December 31, 2024 was $39.5 million, or $4.85 per diluted common share, compared to $29.2 million, or $3.86 per diluted common share, for the six months ended December 31, 2023.

    The Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.01 per share, payable on March 4, 2025, to shareholders of record as of February 18, 2025.

    Discussing these results, Rick Wayne, Chief Executive Officer, said, “Our National Lending Division generated $260.4 million in originated and purchased volume for the quarter, including record originations of $246.4 million. Our small balance SBA 7(a) program with Newity LLC as our loan service provider has continued to grow. For the quarter, we originated $100.3 million, compared to $82.4 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2024 and $13.6 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. During the current quarter we sold $64.5 million of the guaranteed portion of our SBA loans, generating a gain on sale of $5.6 million. Additionally, we approved and initiated an additional at-the-market (“ATM”) offering of up to $75.0 million of our voting common stock, which provides the Bank with the ability to raise capital if and as needed. We are reporting earnings of $2.74 per diluted common share, a return on average equity of 21.1%, and a return on average assets of 2.2%.”

    As of December 31, 2024, total assets were $4.08 billion, an increase of $950.9 million, or 30.4%, from total assets of $3.13 billion as of June 30, 2024.

    1.  The following table highlights the changes in the loan portfolio, including loans held for sale, for the six months ended December 31, 2024:

      Loan Portfolio Changes  
      December 31, 2024
    Balance    		   June 30, 2024
    Balance    		       Change ($)     Change (%)
      (Dollars in thousands)
    National Lending Purchased $ 2,392,417   $ 1,708,551     $ 683,866     40.03 %
    National Lending Originated   1,109,192     981,497       127,695     13.01 %
    SBA National   103,554     48,405       55,149     113.92 %
    Community Banking   20,857     22,704       (1,847 )   (8.14 %)
    Total $ 3,626,020   $ 2,761,157     $ 864,863     31.32 %
                               

    Loans generated by the Bank’s National Lending Division for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 totaled $260.5 million, which consisted of $14.0 million of purchased loans at an average price of 94.8% of unpaid principal balance, and $246.4 million of originated loans.

    An overview of the Bank’s National Lending Division portfolio follows:

      National Lending Portfolio
      Three Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
      Purchased   Originated   Total   Purchased   Originated   Total
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Loans purchased or originated during the period:                                  
    Unpaid principal balance $ 14,815     $ 246,417     $ 261,232     $ 208,045     $ 63,485     $ 271,530  
    Initial net investment basis (1)   14,039       246,417       260,456       186,131       63,485       249,616  
                                       
    Loan returns during the period:                                  
    Yield   8.84%       9.06%       8.91%       9.19%       9.81%       9.43%  
    Total Return on Purchased Loans (2)   8.86%       N/A       8.86%       9.21%       N/A       9.21%  
                                       
      Six Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
      Purchased   Originated   Total   Purchased   Originated   Total
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Loans purchased or originated during the period:                                  
    Unpaid principal balance $ 822,549     $ 373,309     $ 1,195,858     $ 271,741     $ 131,528     $ 403,269  
    Initial net investment basis (1)   746,932       373,309       1,120,241       238,477       131,528       370,005  
                                       
    Loan returns during the period:                                  
    Yield   8.84 %     9.18%       8.95%       9.10%       9.92%       9.41%  
    Total Return on Purchased Loans (2)   8.85%       N/A       8.85%       9.13%       N/A       9.13%  
                                       
    Total loans as of period end:                                  
    Unpaid principal balance $ 2,598,354     $ 1,109,192     $ 3,707,546     $ 1,831,183     $ 910,213     $ 2,741,396  
    Net investment basis   2,392,417       1,109,192       3,501,609       1,646,756       910,213       2,556,969  
                                       

    (1) Initial net investment basis on purchased loans is the initial amortized cost basis net of initial allowance for credit losses (credit mark).
    (2) The total return on purchased loans represents scheduled accretion, accelerated accretion, gains (losses) on real estate owned, release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans, and other noninterest income recorded during the period divided by the average invested balance on an annualized basis. The total return on purchased loans does not include the effect of purchased loan charge-offs or recoveries during the period. Total return on purchased loans is considered a non-GAAP financial measure. See reconciliation in below table entitled “Total Return on Purchased Loans.”

    2. Deposits increased by $811.9 million, or 34.7%, from June 30, 2024. The increase was primarily attributable to increases in time deposits of $773.5 million, or 59.2%. The significant drivers in the change in time deposits were the increase in brokered time deposits, which increased by $660.5 million, and Community Banking Division time deposits, which increased by $90.5 million compared to June 30, 2024.

    3. Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances increased by $62.6 million, or 18.1%, from June 30, 2024. The increase was attributable to one new short-term borrowing, partially offset by net paydowns on amortizing advances.

    4. Shareholders’ equity increased by $67.5 million, or 17.9%, from June 30, 2024, primarily due to net income of $39.5 million and $28.1 million of net proceeds on shares issued in connection with the Bank’s ATM program.

    Net income increased by $8.4 million to $22.4 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to net income of $14.1 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2023.

    1.  Net interest and dividend income before provision for credit losses increased by $11.5 million to $48.5 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to $37.0 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. The increase was primarily due to the following:

    • An increase in interest income earned on loans of $20.2 million, primarily due to higher average balances in the National Lending Division purchased and originated and Small Business Administration (“SBA”) portfolios, partially offset by lower rates earned across the portfolio;
    • An increase in interest income earned on short-term investments of $925 thousand, due to higher average balances, partially offset by lower rates earned; and
    • A decrease in FHLB borrowings interest expense of $2.0 million, primarily due to lower average balances; partially offset by,
    • An increase in deposit interest expense of $11.6 million, primarily due to higher average balances, partially offset by lower rates on interest-bearing deposits.

    The following table summarizes interest income and related yields recognized on the loan portfolios:

      Interest Income and Yield on Loans
      Three Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
      Average   Interest       Average   Interest    
      Balance (1)   Income   Yield   Balance (1)   Income   Yield
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Community Banking $ 21,481   $ 369   6.82 %   $ 25,559   $ 419   6.51 %
    SBA National   93,831     2,751   11.63 %     28,331     888   12.47 %
    National Lending:                              
    Originated   1,041,301     23,769   9.06 %     939,383     23,155   9.81 %
    Purchased   2,407,132     53,655   8.84 %     1,551,038     35,849   9.19 %
    Total National Lending   3,448,433     77,424   8.91 %     2,490,421     59,004   9.43 %
    Total $ 3,563,745   $ 80,544   8.97 %   $ 2,544,311   $ 60,311   9.43 %
     

    Six Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
      Average   Interest       Average   Interest    
      Balance (1)   Income   Yield   Balance (1)   Income   Yield
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Community Banking $ 21,945   $ 738   6.67 %   $ 26,355   $ 857   6.47 %
    SBA National   76,788     5,170   13.36 %     27,294     1,674   12.20 %
    National Lending:                              
    Originated   1,019,347     47,176   9.18 %     950,006     47,375   9.92 %
    Purchased   2,082,969     92,797   8.84 %     1,520,215     69,519   9.10 %
    Total National Lending   3,102,316     139,973   8.95 %     2,470,221     116,894   9.41 %
    Total $ 3,201,049   $ 145,881   9.04 %   $ 2,523,870   $ 119,425   9.41 %

    (1) Includes loans held for sale.

    The components of total income on purchased loans are set forth in the table below entitled “Total Return on Purchased Loans.” When compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2023, transactional income increased by $541 thousand for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, and regularly scheduled interest and accretion increased by $17.3 million primarily due to the increase in average balances. The total return on purchased loans for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 was 8.9%, a decrease from 9.2% for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. The following table details the total return on purchased loans:

      Total Return on Purchased Loans
      Three Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
      Income   Return (1)   Income   Return (1)
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Regularly scheduled interest and accretion $ 50,747   8.36 %   $ 33,430   8.57 %
    Transactional income:                  
    Release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans   97   0.02 %     46   0.02 %
    Accelerated accretion and loan fees   2,908   0.48 %     2,419   0.62 %
    Total transactional income   3,005   0.50 %     2,465   0.64 %
    Total $ 53,752   8.86 %   $ 35,895   9.21 %
       
      Six Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
      Income   Return (1)   Income   Return (1)
      (Dollars in thousands)
    Regularly scheduled interest and accretion $ 87,906   8.37 %   $ 64,460   8.44 %
    Transactional income:                  
    Release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans   161   0.01 %     226   0.03 %
    Accelerated accretion and loan fees   4,891   0.47 %     5,059   0.66 %
    Total transactional income   5,052   0.48 %     5,285   0.69 %
    Total $ 92,958   8.85 %   $ 69,745   9.13 %
                           

    (1) The total return on purchased loans represents scheduled accretion, accelerated accretion, and gains (losses) on real estate owned, and release of allowance for credit losses on purchased loans recorded during the period divided by the average invested balance on an annualized basis. The total return does not include the effect of purchased loan charge-offs or recoveries in the quarter. Total return is considered a non-GAAP financial measure.

    2. Provision for credit losses increased by $1.5 million to $1.9 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to $436 thousand in the quarter ended December 31, 2023. The increase was primarily related to loan growth and increases in specific reserves on certain loans.

    3. Noninterest income increased by $4.5 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2023, primarily due to an increase in gain on sale of SBA loans of $5.0 million, due to the sale of $64.5 million in SBA loans during the quarter ended December 31, 2024 as compared to the sale of $11.5 million during the quarter ended December 31, 2023.

    4. Noninterest expense increased by $3.4 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2023, primarily due to the following:

    • An increase in salaries and employee benefits expense of $1.4 million, primarily due to increases in regular and stock compensation expense;
    • An increase in loan expense of $1.1 million primarily related to increased expenses in connection with the origination of SBA 7(a) loans; and
    • An increase in FDIC insurance expense of $669 thousand, due to the growth of the Bank’s asset size and an increased assessment rate.

    5. Income tax expense increased by $2.7 million to $11.0 million, or an effective tax rate of 32.9%, for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to $8.3 million, or an effective tax rate of 37.1%, for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. The decrease in effective tax rate is primarily due to a write-down of the Bank’s deferred tax asset of $957 thousand in the quarter ended December 31, 2023 as a result of a change in Massachusetts income tax law.

    As of December 31, 2024, nonperforming assets totaled $31.3 million, or 0.77% of total assets, compared to $28.3 million, or 0.90% of total assets, as of June 30, 2024.

    As of December 31, 2024, past due loans totaled $30.5 million, or 0.85% of total loans, compared to past due loans totaling $26.3 million, or 0.95% of total loans, as of June 30, 2024.

    As of December 31, 2024, the Bank’s Tier 1 leverage capital ratio was 11.2%, compared to 12.3% at June 30, 2024, and the Total risk-based capital ratio was 13.9% at December 31, 2024, compared to 14.8% at June 30, 2024. Capital ratios decreased primarily due to the increase in risk-weighted assets and average assets from significant loan growth during the six months ended December 31, 2024, partially offset by increased retained earnings and additional capital raised under the Bank’s ATM program.

    Investor Call Information
    Rick Wayne, Chief Executive Officer, Richard Cohen, Chief Financial Officer, and Pat Dignan, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Credit Officer of Northeast Bank, will host a conference call to discuss second quarter earnings and business outlook at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 7th. To access the conference call by phone, please go to this link (Phone Registration), and you will be provided with dial in details. The call will be available via live webcast, which can be viewed by accessing the Bank’s website at www.northeastbank.com and clicking on the About Us – Investor Relations section. To listen to the webcast, attendees are encouraged to visit the website at least fifteen minutes early to register, download and install any necessary audio software. Please note there will also be a slide presentation that will accompany the webcast. For those who cannot listen to the live broadcast, a replay will be available online for one year at www.northeastbank.com.

    About Northeast Bank
    Northeast Bank (NASDAQ: NBN) is a full-service bank headquartered in Portland, Maine. We offer personal and business banking services to the Maine market via seven branches. Our National Lending Division purchases and originates commercial loans on a nationwide basis. ableBanking, a division of Northeast Bank, offers online savings products to consumers nationwide. Information regarding Northeast Bank can be found at www.northeastbank.com.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    In addition to results presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), this press release contains certain non-GAAP financial measures, including tangible common shareholders’ equity, tangible book value per share, total return on purchased loans, and efficiency ratio. The Bank’s management believes that the supplemental non-GAAP information is utilized by regulators and market analysts to evaluate a company’s financial condition and therefore, such information is useful to investors. These disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for financial results determined in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other companies. Because non-GAAP financial measures are not standardized, it may not be possible to compare these financial measures with other companies’ non-GAAP financial measures having the same or similar names.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We may also make forward-looking statements in other documents we file with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), in our annual reports to our shareholders, in press releases and other written materials, and in oral statements made by our officers, directors or employees. You can identify forward-looking statements by the use of the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,” “assume,” “outlook,” “will,” “should,” and other expressions that predict or indicate future events and trends and which do not relate to historical matters. Although the Bank believes that these forward-looking statements are based on reasonable estimates and assumptions, they are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, contingencies, and other factors. You should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. You should exercise caution in interpreting and relying on forward-looking statements because they are subject to significant risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond the Bank’s control. The Bank’s actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied by such the forward-looking statements as a result of, among other factors, changes in interest rates and real estate values; changes in employment levels, general business and economic conditions on a national basis and in the local markets in which the Bank operates; changes in customer behavior due to changing business and economic conditions (including inflation and concerns about liquidity) or legislative or regulatory initiatives; the possibility that future credits losses are higher than currently expected due to changes in economic assumptions, customer behavior or adverse economic developments; turbulence in the capital and debt markets; competitive pressures from other financial institutions; changes in loan defaults and charge-off rates; changes in the value of securities and other assets, adequacy of credit loss reserves, or deposit levels necessitating increased borrowing to fund loans and investments; changes in legislation and regulation under the new U.S. presidential administration; operational risks including, but not limited to, cybersecurity, fraud, natural disasters, climate change and future pandemics; the risk that the Bank may not be successful in the implementation of its business strategy; the risk that intangibles recorded in the Bank’s financial statements will become impaired; changes in assumptions used in making such forward-looking statements; and the other risks and uncertainties detailed in the Bank’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended by Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A as updated in the Bank’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other filings submitted to the FDIC. These statements speak only as of the date of this release and the Bank does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any of these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this communication or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

    NBN-F

     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    BALANCE SHEETS
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
      December 31, 2024   June 30, 2024  
    Assets            
    Cash and due from banks $ 2,538   $ 2,711    
    Short-term investments   362,332     239,447    
    Total cash and cash equivalents   364,870     242,158    
                 
                 
    Available-for-sale debt securities, at fair value   27,616     48,978    
    Equity securities, at fair value   7,171     7,013    
    Total investment securities   34,787     55,991    
                 
    SBA loans held for sale   35,234     14,506    
                 
    Loans:            
    Commercial real estate   2,703,938     2,028,280    
    Commercial and industrial   778,189     618,846    
    Residential real estate   108,427     99,234    
    Consumer   232     291    
    Total loans   3,590,786     2,746,651    
    Less: Allowance for credit losses   44,773     26,709    
    Loans, net   3,546,013     2,719,942    
                 
                 
    Premises and equipment, net   25,739     27,144    
    Real estate owned and other possessed collateral, net   1,200     –    
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock, at cost   17,798     15,751    
    Loan servicing rights, net   841     984    
    Bank-owned life insurance   19,078     18,830    
    Accrued interest receivable   16,939     15,163    
    Other assets   20,555     21,734    
    Total assets $ 4,083,054   $ 3,132,203    
                 
    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity            
    Deposits:            
    Demand $ 159,002   $ 146,727    
    Savings and interest checking   782,570     732,029    
    Money market   130,063     154,504    
    Time   2,079,703     1,306,203    
    Total deposits   3,151,338     2,339,463    
                 
    Federal Home Loan Bank and other advances   407,824     345,190    
    Lease liability   19,461     20,252    
    Other liabilities   60,330     50,664    
    Total liabilities   3,638,953     2,755,569    
                 
    Commitments and contingencies   –     –    
                 
    Shareholders’ equity            
    Preferred stock, $1.00 par value, 1,000,000 shares authorized; no shares          
    issued and outstanding at December 31 and June 30, 2024   –     –    
    Voting common stock, $1.00 par value, 25,000,000 shares authorized;            
    8,492,856 and 8,127,690 shares issued and outstanding at          
    December 31 and June 30, 2024, respectively   8,493     8,128    
    Non-voting common stock, $1.00 par value, 3,000,000 shares authorized;            
    No shares issued and outstanding at December 31 and June 30, 2024 –   –    
    Additional paid-in capital   92,292     64,762    
    Retained earnings   343,302     303,927    
    Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)   14     (183 )  
    Total shareholders’ equity   444,101     376,634    
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 4,083,054   $ 3,132,203    
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    STATEMENTS OF INCOME
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
        Three Months Ended December 31,   Six Months Ended December 31,
        2024     2023     2024   2023  
      Interest and dividend income:                      
      Interest and fees on loans $ 80,544     $ 60,311     $ 145,881   $ 119,425  
      Interest on available-for-sale securities   436       560       1,031     1,043  
      Other interest and dividend income   4,186       3,261       8,108     6,361  
      Total interest and dividend income   85,166       64,132       155,020     126,829  
                             
      Interest expense:                      
      Deposits   32,777       21,175       59,367     40,433  
      Federal Home Loan Bank advances   3,666       5,701       7,696     11,847  
      Obligation under capital lease agreements   233       256       467     425  
      Total interest expense   36,676       27,132       67,530     52,705  
                             
      Net interest and dividend income before provision for credit losses   48,490       37,000       87,490     74,124  
      Provision for credit losses   1,944       436       2,366     625  
      Net interest and dividend income after provision for credit losses   46,546       36,564       85,124     73,499  
                             
      Noninterest income:                      
      Fees for other services to customers   391       492       834     899  
      Gain on sales of SBA loans   5,570       570       8,901     822  
      Net unrealized gain (loss) on equity securities   (163 )     230       27     72  
      Loss on real estate owned, other repossessed collateral and premises and equipment, net   –       (9 )     –     (9 )
      Bank-owned life insurance income   125       116       248     231  
      Correspondent fee income   23       52       54     143  
      Other noninterest income   3       15       5     87  
      Total noninterest income   5,949       1,466       10,069     2,245  
                             
      Noninterest expense:                      
      Salaries and employee benefits   11,287       9,905       22,470     19,625  
      Occupancy and equipment expense   1,103       1,101       2,182     2,206  
      Professional fees   562       499       1,315     1,281  
      Data processing fees   1,622       1,347       3,109     2,447  
      Marketing expense   94       221       230     482  
      Loan acquisition and collection expense   2,063       939       3,355     1,589  
      FDIC insurance expense   956       287       1,288     644  
      Other noninterest expense   1,379       1,370       2,802     2,784  
      Total noninterest expense   19,066       15,669       36,751     31,058  
                             
      Income before income tax expense   33,429       22,361       58,442     44,686  
      Income tax expense   10,989       8,307       18,896     15,460  
      Net income $ 22,440     $ 14,054     $ 39,546   $ 29,226  
                             
      Weighted-average shares outstanding:                      
      Basic   8,044,345       7,505,109       7,965,486     7,492,310  
      Diluted   8,197,568       7,590,913       8,153,368     7,572,450  
      Earnings per common share:                      
      Basic $ 2.79     $ 1.87     $ 4.96   $ 3.90  
      Diluted   2.74       1.85       4.85     3.86  
      Cash dividends declared per common share $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.02   $ 0.02  
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND ANNUALIZED YIELDS
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands)
      Three Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
          Interest   Average       Interest   Average
      Average   Income/   Yield/   Average   Income/   Yield/
      Balance   Expense   Rate   Balance   Expense   Rate
    Assets:                              
    Interest-earning assets:                              
    Investment securities $ 40,004   $ 436   4.32 %   $ 59,797   $ 560   3.73 %
    Loans (1) (2) (3)   3,563,745     80,544   8.97 %     2,544,311     60,311   9.43 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock   15,458     346   8.88 %     21,222     468   8.77 %
    Short-term investments (4)   325,118     3,840   4.69 %     206,090     2,793   5.39 %
    Total interest-earning assets   3,944,325     85,166   8.57 %     2,831,420     64,132   9.01 %
    Cash and due from banks   2,216               2,508          
    Other non-interest earning assets   30,982               69,245          
    Total assets $ 3,977,523             $ 2,903,173          
                                   
    Liabilities & Shareholders’ Equity:                              
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                              
    NOW accounts $ 581,969   $ 5,932   4.04 %   $ 511,217   $ 5,636   4.39 %
    Money market accounts   128,787     953   2.94 %     229,154     2,009   3.49 %
    Savings accounts   187,701     1,653   3.49 %     122,643     917   2.97 %
    Time deposits   2,080,911     24,239   4.62 %     1,022,767     12,613   4.91 %
    Total interest-bearing deposits   2,979,368     32,777   4.36 %     1,885,781     21,175   4.47 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   336,762     3,666   4.32 %     481,824     5,701   4.71 %
    Lease liability   19,599     233   4.72 %     21,361     256   4.77 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3,335,729     36,676   4.36 %     2,388,966     27,132   4.52 %
                                   
    Non-interest bearing liabilities:                              
    Demand deposits and escrow accounts   190,135               167,358          
    Other liabilities   30,501               24,616          
    Total liabilities   3,556,365               2,580,940          
    Shareholders’ equity   421,158               322,233          
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 3,977,523             $ 2,903,173          
                                   
    Net interest income       $ 48,490             $ 37,000    
                                   
    Interest rate spread             4.21 %               4.49 %
    Net interest margin (5)             4.88 %               5.20 %
                                   
    Cost of funds (6)             4.13 %               4.22 %
                                   
    (1)  Interest income and yield are stated on a fully tax-equivalent basis using the statutory tax rate.
    (2)  Includes loans held for sale.
    (3)  Nonaccrual loans are included in the computation of average, but unpaid interest has not been included for purposes of determining interest income.
    (4)  Short-term investments include FHLB overnight deposits and other interest-bearing deposits.
    (5)  Net interest margin is calculated as net interest income divided by total interest-earning assets.
    (6)  Cost of funds is calculated as total interest expense divided by total interest-bearing liabilities plus demand deposits and escrow accounts.
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    AVERAGE BALANCE SHEETS AND ANNUALIZED YIELDS
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands)
      Six Months Ended December 31,
      2024     2023  
          Interest   Average       Interest   Average
      Average   Income/   Yield/   Average   Income/   Yield/
      Balance   Expense   Rate   Balance   Expense   Rate
    Assets:                              
    Interest-earning assets:                              
    Investment securities $ 47,708   $ 1,031   4.29 %   $ 59,986   $ 1,043   3.46 %
    Loans (1) (2) (3)   3,201,049     145,881   9.04 %     2,523,870     119,425   9.41 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank stock   15,961     676   8.40 %     21,790     881   8.04 %
    Short-term investments (4)   285,330     7,432   5.17 %     203,946     5,480   5.34 %
    Total interest-earning assets   3,550,048     155,020   8.66 %     2,809,592     126,829   8.98 %
    Cash and due from banks   2,164               2,500          
    Other non-interest earning assets   62,527               62,753          
    Total assets $ 3,614,739             $ 2,874,845          
                                   
    Liabilities & Shareholders’ Equity:                              
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                              
    NOW accounts $ 572,849   $ 12,312   4.26 %   $ 499,331   $ 10,781   4.29 %
    Money market accounts   138,738     2,219   3.17 %     243,725     4,142   3.38 %
    Savings accounts   183,141     3,210   3.48 %     106,820     1,477   2.75 %
    Time deposits   1,735,372     41,626   4.76 %     999,993     24,033   4.78 %
    Total interest-bearing deposits   2,630,100     59,367   4.48 %     1,849,869     40,433   4.35 %
    Federal Home Loan Bank advances   349,678     7,696   4.37 %     496,169     11,847   4.75 %
    Lease liability   19,808     467   4.68 %     21,568     425   3.92 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   2,999,586     67,530   4.47 %     2,367,606     52,705   4.43 %
                                   
    Non-interest bearing liabilities:                              
    Demand deposits and escrow accounts   182,648               168,348          
    Other liabilities   28,337               24,842          
    Total liabilities   3,210,571               2,560,796          
    Shareholders’ equity   404,168               314,049          
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 3,614,739             $ 2,874,845          
                                   
    Net interest income       $ 87,490             $ 74,124    
                                   
    Interest rate spread             4.19 %               4.55 %
    Net interest margin (5)             4.89 %               5.25 %
                                   
    Cost of funds (6)             4.21 %               4.04 %
                                   
    (1)  Interest income and yield are stated on a fully tax-equivalent basis using the statutory tax rate.
    (2)  Includes loans held for sale.
    (3)  Nonaccrual loans are included in the computation of average, but unpaid interest has not been included for purposes of determining interest income.
    (4)  Short-term investments include FHLB overnight deposits and other interest-bearing deposits.
    (5)  Net interest margin is calculated as net interest income divided by total interest-earning assets.
    (6)  Cost of funds is calculated as total interest expense divided by total interest-bearing liabilities plus demand deposits and escrow accounts.
     
    NORTHEAST BANK
    SELECTED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS AND OTHER DATA
    (Unaudited)
    (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
      Three Months Ended
      December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023
    Net interest income $ 48,490     $ 39,000     $ 37,935     $ 36,512     $ 37,000  
    Provision for credit losses   1,944       422       547       596       436  
    Noninterest income   5,949       4,119       2,092       1,542       1,466  
    Noninterest expense   19,066       17,685       17,079       16,429       15,669  
    Net income   22,440       17,106       15,140       13,865       14,054  
                       
    Weighted-average common shares outstanding:                  
    Basic   8,044,345       7,886,148       7,765,868       7,509,320       7,505,109  
    Diluted   8,197,568       8,108,688       7,910,692       7,595,124       7,590,913  
    Earnings per common share:                  
    Basic $ 2.79     $ 2.17     $ 1.95     $ 1.85     $ 1.87  
    Diluted   2.74       2.11       1.91       1.83       1.85  
                       
    Dividends declared per common share $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.01     $ 0.01  
                       
    Return on average assets   2.24%       2.09%       1.99%       1.87%       1.93%  
    Return on average equity   21.14%       17.53%       16.56%       16.45%       17.35%  
    Net interest rate spread (1)   4.21%       4.18%       4.41%       4.27%       4.49%  
    Net interest margin (2)   4.88%       4.90%       5.13%       5.01%       5.20%  
    Efficiency ratio (non-GAAP) (3)   35.02%       41.01%       42.67%       43.17%       40.73%  
    Noninterest expense to average total assets   1.90%       2.16%       2.24%       2.21%       2.15%  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities   118.24%       118.48%       118.78%       119.28%       118.52%  
                       
      As of:
      December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024   December 31, 2023
    Nonperforming loans:                  
    Originated portfolio:                  
    Residential real estate $ 2,446     $ 3,976     $ 2,502     $ 2,573     $ 2,582  
    Commercial real estate   3,662       4,682       1,407       2,075       2,075  
    Commercial and industrial   6,696       6,684       6,520       6,928       6,950  
    Consumer   5       –       –       –       –  
    Total originated portfolio   12,809       15,342       10,429       11,576       11,607  
    Total purchased portfolio   17,257       21,830       17,832       16,370       19,165  
    Total nonperforming loans   30,066       37,172       28,261       27,946       30,772  
    Real estate owned and other repossessed collateral, net   1,200       –       –       –       –  
    Total nonperforming assets $ 31,266     $ 37,172     $ 28,261     $ 27,946     $ 30,772  
                       
    Past due loans to total loans   0.85%       0.89%       0.95%       1.13%       1.22%  
    Nonperforming loans to total loans   0.84%       1.06%       1.02%       1.05%       1.18%  
    Nonperforming assets to total assets   0.77%       0.94%       0.90%       0.93%       1.04%  
    Allowance for credit losses to total loans   1.25%       1.25%       0.97%       0.98%       1.06%  
    Allowance for credit losses to nonperforming loans   148.92%       117.40%       94.51%       92.83%       89.67%  
    Net charge-offs (recoveries) $ 869     $ 1,604     $ 1,347     $ 2,225     $ 995  
    Commercial real estate loans to total capital (4)   542.12%       604.38%       482.13%       509.08%       544.34%  
    Net loans to deposits   112.52%       110.70%       116.88%       118.15%       121.31%  
    Purchased loans to total loans   66.63%       69.11%       61.88%       60.99%       63.07%  
    Equity to total assets   10.88%       9.96%       12.02%       11.73%       11.03%  
    Common equity tier 1 capital ratio   12.66%       11.45%       13.84%       13.24%       12.63%  
    Total risk-based capital ratio   13.91%       12.70%       14.82%       14.22%       13.71%  
    Tier 1 leverage capital ratio   11.16%       12.06%       12.30%       11.79%       11.28%  
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $ 444,101     $ 392,557     $ 376,634     $ 351,913     $ 327,540  
    Less: Preferred stock   –       –       –       –       –  
    Common shareholders’ equity   444,101       392,557       376,634       351,913       327,540  
    Less: Intangible assets (5)   –       –       –       –       –  
    Tangible common shareholders’ equity (non-GAAP) $ 444,101     $ 392,557     $ 376,634     $ 351,913     $ 327,540  
                       
    Common shares outstanding   8,492,856       8,212,026       8,127,690       7,977,690       7,804,052  
    Book value per common share $ 52.29     $ 47.80     $ 46.34     $ 44.11     $ 41.97  
    Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP) (6)   52.29       47.80       46.34       44.11       41.97  
                       
    (1) The net interest rate spread represents the difference between the weighted-average yield on interest-earning assets and the weighted-average cost of interest-bearing liabilities for the period.
    (2) The net interest margin represents net interest income as a percent of average interest-earning assets for the period.
    (3) The efficiency ratio represents noninterest expense divided by the sum of net interest income (before the credit loss provision) plus noninterest income.
    (4) For purposes of calculating this ratio, commercial real estate includes all non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans defined as such by regulatory guidance, including all land development and construction loans.
    (5) Includes the loan servicing rights asset.
    (6) Tangible book value per share represents total shareholders’ equity less the sum of preferred stock and intangible assets divided by common shares outstanding.
     

    For More Information:
    Richard Cohen, Chief Financial Officer
    Northeast Bank, 27 Pearl Street, Portland, Maine 04101
    207.786.3245 ext. 3249
    www.northeastbank.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 02.06.2025 Sen. Cruz Introduces Constitutional Amendment to Prevent Democrats from Court Packing the Supreme Court

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman of the Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights, introduced a constitutional amendment to maintain a total of nine Supreme Court justices on the bench at a time.
    Once approved by Congress, the amendment would go to the states for ratification.
    Upon introduction, Sen. Cruz said, “For years, Democrats have openly said they intend to pack the Supreme Court. They seek to use the Court to advance policy goals they can’t accomplish electorally. Such a move would be a direct assault on the design of our Constitution, which is designed to ensure the Supreme Court remains a non-partisan guardian of the rule of law. This amendment is a badly-needed check on their efforts to undermine the integrity of the Court.”
    Sen. Grassley said, “Democrats’ radical court packing scheme would erase the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and destroy historic precedent. The Court is a co-equal branch of government, and our Keep Nine Amendment will ensure that it remains independent from political pressure.”
    Sen. Cornyn said, “Democrats have turned the legal system into a vehicle for advancing policy goals they can’t achieve at the ballot box or in Congress. I’m proud to join Sen. Cruz in supporting this resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to prevent the Democrats from packing the Court and undermining the rule of law.”
    Sen. Lee said, “It is vital that we protect the independence and integrity of the Supreme Court. Radical Democrats will not stop trying to rig the decisions they want through court packing, and this legislation would permanently take that dangerous option off the table.”
    Sen. Crapo said, “Throughout our nation’s history, the Supreme Court has successfully safeguarded our Constitution. Packing the Court would unnecessarily increase partisanship within the institution, creating greater challenges in settling the pressing cases that matter to Americans in a constitutional and just way.”
    Sen. Capito said, “A nine Justice court has worked for our country for more than 150 years. Increasing that number in a partisan effort to achieve a desired policy result is a never-ending proposition. If court-packing were pursued, respect for the Supreme Court would plummet and the checks and balances of our constitutional order would be threatened. We should preserve our independent judiciary by closing the door to the Democrats radical court packing proposals.”
    Sen. Blackburn said, “The radical left wants to pack the Supreme Court to implement their socialist agenda. The number of justices on our nation’s highest court should stay the same regardless of which party is in power.”
    Sen. Cassidy said, “Packing the courts to achieve a preordained outcome is not what our Founding Fathers had in mind. Nine justices has been a good number for 156 years; I’m sure it will be for another 156.”
    Sen. Young said, “Though there is less talk about court packing these days from Democrats, adding to the Supreme Court remains a bad idea. I am again supporting this legislation to protect the constitutional credibility of the Supreme Court.”
    Sen. Hyde-Smith said, “The Supreme Court was designed by our Founders to protect justice, not be used as a political pawn.  We need to keep it that way.  Packing the Court for political leverage destabilizes the integrity of the institution and is dangerous for our country.  If this constitutional amendment is approved by Congress and the states, the issue will be settled for good.”
    Sen. Banks said, “Americans forcefully rejected Democrats at the ballot box last year. Their backup plan is to override the will of the voters by packing the Court. This amendment crushes that plan.”
    Sen. Risch said, “Democrats’ attempts to pack the Supreme Court with radical appointees undermines our democracy and American confidence in our judicial system. The Keep Nine Constitutional Amendment would ensure justices focus on upholding the rule of law rather than legislating from the bench.”
    The proposed constitutional amendment was co-sponsored by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Jim Banks (R-Ind.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Katie Britt (R-Ala.), Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), and Deb Fischer (R-Neb.).
    Read the complete text of the amendment here.
    BACKGROUND
    Sen. Cruz previously introduced this amendment in 2023 and 2020.
    Over the past several years, top Democrats have pledged to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court when they are able to.
    Former Vice President Kamala Harris said “We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court […] We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that.” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) posted online “Mitch McConnell set the precedent. No Supreme Court vacancies filled in an election year. If he violates it, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court.” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)called court-packing “long-overdue court reform.” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said “I’m open. […] Actually, I mean, we could. […] Look, there are a lot of different ways to do it. The number of people on the Supreme Court is not constitutionally constricted.”
    Meanwhile Democrats, including Joe Biden, falsely called Senate Republican’s efforts to confirm Judge Barrett “court-packing.” Sen. Cruz has said, “Court-packing does not mean nominating a justice to fill a vacancy. […] It is expanding the number of justices. And, you know, Joe Biden in 1983 said court-packing was ‘a bone-headed idea,’ and now that bone-headed idea I think is their agenda number one if they win on Election Day.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: First Pacific Bancorp Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    WHITTIER, Calif., Feb. 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — First Pacific Bancorp (the “Company”) (OTC Pink: FPBC), the holding company for First Pacific Bank (the “Bank”), today reported consolidated results for the fourth quarter and year ending December 31, 2024, marking its seventh consecutive quarter of profitability. The Company remains well-capitalized, with a robust liquidity position supported by a stable core deposit base and access to substantial sources of liquidity.

    Highlights for the fourth quarter and full year 2024 include:

    • Total assets ended 2024 at $433 million, up $13 million from $420 million at year end 2023.
    • Total deposits ended 2024 at $351 million, up $18 million since year end 2023.
    • Total loans ended 2024 at $277 million, up $2 million from year end 2023.
    • Asset quality remains excellent with minimal levels of classified or non-performing assets.
    • The Bank ended the fourth quarter with a strong capital position, with a leverage capital ratio of 9.0% and a total risk-based capital ratio of 13.4%.
    • As of December 31, 2024, cash and cash equivalents totaled $41 million, including funds invested overnight, up $19 million since year end 2023.
    • Unused borrowing capacity from credit facilities in place on December 31, 2024, totaled $167 million.

    For the fourth quarter ending December 31, 2024, the Company realized a pre-tax, pre-provision profit of $702 thousand, compared to a pre-tax, pre-provision profit of $345 thousand in Q3 2024. Net income for the fourth quarter of 2024 was $500 thousand, up from $249 thousand in Q3 2024. For the twelve months ending December 31, 2024, the Company reported $1.1 million in net income, up from a net loss of $164 thousand reported for the twelve months ending December 31, 2023.     

    Asset quality remains excellent with minimal non-performing assets and the allowance for credit losses is 1.15% of total loans. There was no provision for credit losses recognized for the year ending 2024, compared to $906 thousand for the year ending December 31, 2023.

    “We are pleased to close out 2024 on a strong note, achieving seven consecutive quarters of profitability and demonstrating the success of our strategic approach,” said Joe Matranga, Chairman of the Board of Directors. “With a solid capital position, strong liquidity, and sound financial standing, we are well-positioned to continue to execute our strategy and drive sustainable, long-term value for our stakeholders.”

    “We delivered another strong quarter of financial results highlighted by loan and deposit growth, excellent asset quality, and a solid capital and liquidity position,” said Nathan Rogge, President and Chief Executive Officer. “We enter 2025 with strong momentum and a clear growth strategy, driven by strategic investments in technology and innovation designed to enhance the banking experience and reinforce our competitive advantage.”

    “As a Southern California-based company, we are deeply saddened by the devastation caused by the recent wildfires. Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone impacted by this disaster and we are committed to helping Los Angeles move forward.”

    ABOUT FIRST PACIFIC BANK

    First Pacific Bank is a wholly owned subsidiary of First Pacific Bancorp (OTC Pink: FPBC) and is a growing community bank catering to individuals, professionals, and small-to-medium sized businesses throughout Southern California. Since opening in 2006, the Bank has offered a personalized approach, access to decision makers, a broad range of solutions, and a commitment to delivering an exceptional customer experience. First Pacific Bank operates locations in Los Angeles County, Orange County, San Diego County, and the Inland Empire. For more information, visit firstpacbank.com or call 888.BNK.AT.FPB.

    FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

    This news release may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and First Pacific Bancorp intends for such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Future events are difficult to predict, and the expectations described above are necessarily subject to risk and uncertainty that may cause actual results to differ materially and adversely. Forward-looking statements relate to, among other things, our business plan, and strategies, and can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. They often include the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “estimate,” or words of similar meaning, or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “would,” “should,” “could,” or “may” and similar expressions. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, nor should they be relied upon as representing management’s views as of any subsequent date. Factors that might cause such differences include, but are not limited to: successfully realizing the benefits of our business strategy and plans,; changes in general economic and financial market conditions, either nationally or locally, in areas in which First Pacific Bank conducts its operations; effects of inflation and changes in interest rates; continuing consolidation in the financial services industry; new litigation or changes in existing litigation; increased competitive challenges and expanding product and pricing pressures among financial institutions; impact of any natural disasters, including earthquakes; effect of governmental supervision and regulation, including any regulatory or other enforcement actions; legislation or regulatory changes which adversely affect First Pacific Bank’s operations or business; loss of key personnel; and changes in accounting policies or procedures as may be required by the Financial Accounting Standards Board or other regulatory agencies. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect occurrences or unanticipated events, or circumstances after the date of such statements except as required by law.  

    — Summary Financial Tables Follow —

    First PacificBancorp          
    Consolidated Balance Sheets          
    (Unaudited)          
      Dec 31, 2024 Sep 30, 2024 Jun 30, 2024 Mar 31, 2024 Dec 31, 2023
    ASSETS          
    Cash and due from banks $ 4,708,926   $ 23,584,084   $ 4,671,483   $ 7,317,500   $ 4,308,149  
    Fed funds sold & int-bearing balances   36,290,000     25,520,000     37,860,000     37,575,000     18,060,000  
    Total cash and cash equivalents   40,998,926     49,104,084     42,531,483     44,892,500     22,368,149  
               
    Debt securities (AFS)   1,866,022     3,041,852     3,077,666     5,138,340     5,257,049  
    Debt securities (HTM)   100,257,560     101,260,391     102,202,926     103,474,749     104,343,133  
    Total debt securities   102,123,582     104,302,243     105,280,592     108,613,089     109,600,182  
               
    Construction & land development   23,320,351     23,067,204     24,651,513     25,480,398     27,070,749  
    1-4 Family residential   58,588,090     58,082,570     68,588,393     68,521,663     66,567,165  
    Multifamily residential   28,561,276     28,966,811     26,800,829     26,947,419     27,128,177  
    Nonfarm, nonresidential real estate   100,066,570     99,715,860     94,643,169     97,893,840     99,627,812  
    Commercial & industrial   62,322,690     57,342,017     53,504,969     54,785,564     53,938,659  
    Consumer & Other   4,525,108     780,639     1,831,036     1,123,918     865,849  
    Total loans   277,384,085     267,955,101     270,019,909     274,752,802     275,198,411  
    Allowance for credit losses (loans)   (3,179,637 )   (3,109,975 )   (3,109,975 )   (3,109,975 )   (3,109,975 )
    Total loans, net   274,204,448     264,845,126     266,909,934     271,642,827     272,088,436  
               
    Premises, equipment, and ROU net   1,328,964     1,452,886     1,714,833     1,992,588     2,268,671  
    Goodwill, core deposit & other intangibles   1,273,134     1,287,129     1,298,084     1,313,367     1,328,651  
    Bank owned life insurance   5,287,738     5,257,550     5,227,763     5,198,654     5,170,521  
    Accrued interest and other assets   7,755,355     7,505,380     7,476,554     7,415,609     7,392,301  
               
    Total Assets $ 432,972,147   $ 433,754,398   $ 430,439,243   $ 441,068,634   $ 420,216,911  
               
    LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY          
    Deposits:          
    Noninterest-bearing demand $ 131,515,568   $ 129,473,091   $ 144,240,187   $ 133,945,262   $ 121,348,095  
    Interest-bearing transaction accounts   28,454,639     24,660,000     24,797,108     28,166,207     34,716,150  
    Money market and savings   146,423,126     143,270,628     143,497,864     148,732,230     139,011,862  
    Time deposits   44,302,867     44,388,137     41,060,590     38,662,227     38,235,413  
    Total deposits   350,696,200     341,791,856     353,595,749     349,505,926     333,311,520  
               
    Borrowings   40,000,000     50,000,000     35,000,000     50,000,000     45,000,000  
    Accrued interest and other liabilities   3,122,902     3,430,132     3,781,444     3,936,909     4,530,208  
    Total liabilities   393,819,102     395,221,988     392,377,193     403,442,835     382,841,728  
               
    Shareholders’ Equity:          
    Capital stock and APIC   37,272,567     37,117,627     36,970,386     36,788,606     36,699,786  
    Retained earnings   2,650,877     2,151,305     1,902,788     1,705,174     1,543,264  
    Accum other comprehensive income   (770,399 )   (736,522 )   (811,124 )   (867,981 )   (867,867 )
    Total shareholders’ equity   39,153,045     38,532,410     38,062,050     37,625,799     37,375,183  
               
    Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity $ 432,972,147   $ 433,754,398   $ 430,439,243   $ 441,068,634   $ 420,216,911  
               
    First PacificBancorp          
    Consolidated Income Statements – Quarterly          
    (Unaudited)          
               
      Dec 31, 2024 Sep 30, 2024 Jun 30, 2024 Mar 31, 2024 Dec 31, 2023
    INTEREST INCOME          
    Loans, including fees $ 4,814,128 $ 4,817,174 $ 4,655,844 $ 4,700,535 $ 4,653,303  
    Debt securities   484,508   499,268   514,613   543,857   544,330  
    Fed funds & int-bearing balances   419,597   450,166   573,022   410,685   258,178  
    Total interest income   5,718,233   5,766,608   5,743,479   5,655,077   5,455,811  
               
    INTEREST EXPENSE          
    Deposits   1,777,351   1,790,578   1,687,121   1,746,032   1,542,541  
    Borrowings   332,375   444,250   524,599   507,390   705,324  
    Total interest expense   2,109,726   2,234,828   2,211,720   2,253,422   2,247,865  
               
    Net interest income   3,608,507   3,531,780   3,531,759   3,401,655   3,207,946  
               
    Provision for credit losses   –   –   –   –   101,538  
               
    Net interest income after provision   3,608,507   3,531,780   3,531,759   3,401,655   3,106,408  
               
    NONINTEREST INCOME          
    Service charges, fees and other income   119,173   106,628   96,460   108,365   108,769  
    Sublease income   –   53,975   52,970   53,872   53,872  
    Gains (losses) on sale of assets   –   15,335   –   –   (12,982 )
    Gains on early payoff of debt   54,125   –   144,325   –   –  
    Total noninterest income   173,298   175,938   293,755   162,237   149,659  
               
    NONINTEREST EXPENSE          
    Salaries and benefits   1,984,774   2,154,290   2,182,674   2,178,486   1,954,029  
    Occupancy and equipment   258,180   374,069   363,695   368,816   384,088  
    Other expense   836,692   834,281   1,007,247   794,158   894,440  
    Total noninterest expense   3,079,646   3,362,640   3,553,616   3,341,460   3,232,557  
               
    Income before income tax expense   702,159   345,078   271,898   222,432   23,510  
               
    Income tax expense (benefit)   202,586   96,563   74,281   60,524   (31,955 )
               
    Net Income $ 499,573 $ 248,515 $ 197,617 $ 161,908 $ 55,465  
               
    Earnings per share basic (QTR) $ 0.12 $ 0.06 $ 0.05 $ 0.04 $ 0.01  
    Weighted average shares outstanding (QTR)   4,293,829   4,288,851   4,283,351   4,281,653   4,231,841  
               
    First PacificBancorp    
    Consolidated Income Statements – Year-to-Date    
    (Unaudited)    
         
      Dec 31, 2024 Dec 31, 2023
    INTEREST INCOME    
    Loans, including fees $ 18,987,681 $ 16,705,212  
    Investment securities   2,042,246   2,279,349  
    Fed funds & int-bearing balances   1,853,470   1,000,827  
    Total interest income   22,883,397   19,985,388  
         
    INTEREST EXPENSE    
    Deposits   7,001,082   4,744,486  
    Borrowings   1,808,614   2,440,727  
    Total interest expense   8,809,696   7,185,213  
         
    Net interest income   14,073,701   12,800,175  
         
    Provision for credit losses   –   905,966  
         
    Net interest income after provision   14,073,701   11,894,209  
         
    NONINTEREST INCOME    
    Service charges, fees and other income   430,626   455,823  
    Sublease income   160,817   212,074  
    Gains (losses) on sale of assets   15,335   129,093  
    Gains on early payoff of debt   198,450   123,077  
    Total noninterest income   805,228   920,067  
         
    NON INTEREST EXPENSE    
    Salaries and benefits   8,500,224   8,558,603  
    Occupancy and equipment   1,364,760   1,470,277  
    Other expense   3,472,378   3,124,577  
    Total noninterest expense   13,337,362   13,153,457  
         
    Income before income tax expense   1,541,567   (339,181 )
         
    Income tax expense (benefit)   433,954   (175,262 )
         
    Net Income (loss) $ 1,107,613 $ (163,919 )
         
    Earnings (loss) per share basic (YTD) $ 0.26 $ (0.04 )
    Weighted average shares outstanding (YTD)   4,286,945   3,992,738  
               
    First PacificBancorp            
    Quarterly Financial Highlights            
    (Unaudited)            
        Quarterly
        2024 2024 2024 2024 2023
    ($ in thousands except per share data)   4th Qtr 3rd Qtr 2nd Qtr 1st Qtr 4th Qtr
    EARNINGS            
    Net interest income $ 3,609   3,532   3,532   3,402   3,208  
    Provision for loan losses $ 0   0   0   0   102  
    Noninterest income $ 173   176   294   162   150  
    Noninterest expense $ 3,080   3,363   3,554   3,341   3,233  
    Income tax expense $ 203   97   74   61   (32 )
    Net income $ 500   249   198   162   55  
                 
    Earnings per share basic $ 0.12   0.06   0.05   0.04   0.01  
    Weighted average shares outstanding   4,293,829   4,288,851   4,283,351   4,281,653   4,231,841  
    Ending shares outstanding   4,294,500   4,291,927   4,283,351   4,283,351   4,231,841  
                 
    PERFORMANCE RATIOS            
    Return on average assets   0.47 % 0.23 % 0.18 % 0.15 % 0.05 %
    Return on average common equity   5.12 % 2.58 % 2.10 % 1.73 % 0.59 %
    Yield on loans   6.91 % 6.98 % 6.97 % 6.84 % 6.69 %
    Yield on earning assets   5.50 % 5.58 % 5.52 % 5.49 % 5.35 %
    Cost of deposits   1.98 % 2.05 % 1.96 % 2.05 % 1.89 %
    Cost of funding   2.18 % 2.32 % 2.28 % 2.35 % 2.37 %
    Net interest margin   3.47 % 3.42 % 3.40 % 3.31 % 3.15 %
    Efficiency ratio   81.4 % 90.7 % 92.9 % 93.8 % 96.3 %
                 
    CAPITAL            
    Tangible equity to tangible assets   8.77 % 8.61 % 8.57 % 8.26 % 8.61 %
    Book value (BV) per common share $ 9.12   8.98   8.89   8.78   8.83  
    Tangible BV per common share $ 8.82   8.68   8.58   8.48   8.52  
                 
    ASSET QUALITY            
    Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) $ 0   0   0   0   0  
    Allowance for credit losses (loans) $ 3,180   3,110   3,110   3,110   3,110  
    Allowance to total loans   1.15 % 1.16 % 1.15 % 1.13 % 1.13 %
    Nonperforming loans $ 672   991   77   160   61  
                 
    END OF PERIOD BALANCES            
    Total loans $ 277,384   267,955   270,020   274,753   275,198  
    Total assets $ 432,972   433,754   430,439   441,069   420,217  
    Deposits $ 350,696   341,792   353,596   349,506   333,312  
    Loans to deposits   79.1 % 78.4 % 76.4 % 78.6 % 82.6 %
    Shareholders’ equity $ 39,153   38,532   38,062   37,626   37,375  
    Full-time equivalent employees   49   44   44   46   45  
                 
    AVERAGE BALANCES (QTRLY)            
    Total loans $ 276,294   273,960   267,766   275,578   276,016  
    Earning assets $ 412,417   410,298   416,965   412,791   404,210  
    Total assets $ 425,750   424,199   430,830   426,592   417,595  
    Deposits $ 355,369   346,142   346,032   341,226   323,300  
    Shareholders’ equity $ 38,746   38,267   37,788   37,443   37,179  

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Amnesty International – Trump’s claim that US will take over Gaza and forcibly deport Palestinians is appalling and unlawful

    Source: Amnesty International

    Israel/ OPT: President Trump’s claim that US will take over Gaza and forcibly deport Palestinians appalling and unlawful

    Reacting to President Donald Trump’s comments that the USA will “take over the Gaza Strip”, advocating again for the forcible transfer of around 2 million Palestinians from Gaza to neighbouring countries, Amnesty International’s Secretary General Agnès Callamard said:

    “President Trump’s remarks calling for the forcible transfer of Palestinians from the occupied Gaza Strip must be unequivocally and widely condemned. His language is inflammatory, outrageous and shameful, and his proposal amounts to a flagrant violation of international law.

    “Any plan to forcibly deport Palestinians outside the occupied territory against their will is a war crime, and when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack on the civilian population, it would constitute a crime against humanity.

    “President Trump’s comments dangerously dehumanizes Palestinians, who for the last 16-months have been victims of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and for decades have been living under illegal occupation and apartheid. Most of Gaza’s Palestinians are descendants and survivors of the 1948 Nakba, they have already been repeatedly uprooted and dispossessed by Israel and denied their right of return yet have continued to struggle to remain on their lands and defend their human rights.

    “Israel’s genocide in Gaza, including through unlawful killings, injuries and the deliberate infliction of conditions of life that are calculated to bring about their physical destruction,  has been accompanied by an alarming rise in unlawful killings in the occupied West Bank, state-backed settler violence, mass land confiscation and arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, torture and other ill-treatment of Palestinians across the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel.

    “President Trump repeatedly referenced the destruction, killing and unlivable conditions in Gaza calling it a ‘demolition site’ while seated next to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, yet he completely failed to mention the Israeli government’s responsibility for causing this devastation. Nor did he acknowledge the US government’s role in providing arms that have repeatedly been used to carry out deadly, unlawful attacks in Gaza.

    “In the face of President Trump’s dangerous threats, it’s more important than ever for the rest of the international community to categorically reject these proposals and expedite diplomatic efforts, in line with international law, to end Israel’s unlawful occupation, dismantle apartheid and uphold human rights for Palestinians and Israelis. History has abundantly demonstrated that sidelining international law for political expediency is a recipe for the perpetuation of violations.

    “Amnesty International also warns against the misuse of desperately needed humanitarian aid and reconstruction as a bargaining chip or as a means to coerce Palestinians in Gaza into leaving. No state is entitled to treat a protected population living under occupation as pawns in a geopolitical chess game.”

    MIL OSI – Submitted News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Risch, Daines Introduce Bill to Give Small Businesses Permanent Tax Break

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Idaho James E Risch

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Jim Risch (R-Idaho) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.) introduced the Main Street Tax Certainty Act to permanently extend the 20 percent tax deduction for pass-through businesses. Should these tax cuts expire, small businesses will face an immediate and massive tax hike.

    “Inflicting a 20% tax increase on Idaho’s small businesses would be damaging to our economy and local communities,” said Risch. “The Main Street Tax Certainty Actensures these establishments remain the driving force Idaho’s economy and thrive for generations to come.”

    “As the son of a contractor, I’ve seen firsthand the hard work it takes to keep a small business flourishing- especially as Americans are still grappling with the effects of Joe Biden’s inflation. It’s absolutely crucial that we pass this legislation to prevent a 20 percent tax increase for hardworking Montanans and I’ll keep fighting for ways to support Montana small businesses, which provide the majority of jobs in our state,” said Daines.

    The 20% small business deduction was created as a part of President Trump’s 2017 tax cuts to level the playing field between small businesses and large corporations. Without Congressional action, 9 out of 10 small businesses will be hit with a massive tax hike when this deduction is set to expire at the end of 2025.  

    Senators John Thune (R-S.D.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Katie Britt (R-Ala.), Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Jim Justice (R-W.V.), Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), Todd Young (R-Ind.), John Kennedy (R-La.) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.) joined Risch and Daines in introducing the legislation.

    Recently, a new study from Ernst and Young (EY) highlighted the economic activity supported by this small and family-owned business tax deduction, including 2.6 million jobs and $325 billion of the GDP.?

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Lessons learned and challenges ahead for central banks in the Americas

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Introduction

    Welcome, everyone, and thank you for attending the first edition of the Chapultepec Conference. The aim of this event is to allow central bank Governors to reflect and share perspectives on the major economic and financial issues facing the Americas. I am sure that today’s meeting will be followed by many others.

    Today’s conference has a rich agenda. We started this morning by discussing global financial conditions and digital innovations. After lunch, we will turn to monetary policy.

    I will use my time today to give some background to this afternoon’s discussions. I will aim to provide some perspective on the course of monetary policy in the Americas over the past few years. I will then turn to what I see as the key challenges facing central banks in the region in the coming years. My comments will focus on Latin America, although many of the themes have broader relevance.

    Latin America’s response to the Covid crisis

    Monetary policy developments in recent years have been profoundly shaped by the events of the Covid-19 pandemic and its immediate aftermath.

    When the pandemic struck in 2020, central banks throughout the world took decisive measures. They lowered interest rates to record lows, offered new liquidity facilities and expanded existing ones. Many central banks also made asset purchases.

    For advanced economy central banks, including the Federal Reserve and the Bank of Canada, the policy response followed a broadly familiar playbook, although the size of the response was unusually large.

    But for many emerging market economy central banks, including those in Latin America, such a strong, countercyclical policy response marked a departure. In past crises, policy had often responded procyclically, not least due to concerns about possible currency depreciation.

    Two factors contributed to this different response in Latin America during the pandemic. First, monetary policy frameworks in Latin America had been strengthened over the previous decades. In particular, the autonomy obtained in the 1990s was a rock-solid foundation, without which a countercyclical policy response would not have been possible. Second, the pandemic was a global shock. The fact that central banks worldwide, including the Federal Reserve, were loosening their policy stances no doubt made it easier for central banks in Latin America to follow suit.

    While the policy easing at the start of the pandemic was highly synchronous, the tightening in its aftermath was less so. Central banks in Latin America, in particular, were relatively quick to unwind emergency policy settings in response to emerging inflationary pressures in early 2021. In doing so, they drew on the experiences of the 1970s and 1980s, when high inflation and wage-price spirals were prevalent. Monetary policy in advanced economies was, in my view, more heavily influenced by the extended period of below-target inflation that preceded the pandemic.

    Early and forceful policy tightening worked. By slowing demand, it contributed directly to lowering inflation. Just as importantly, decisive tightening helped keep long-term inflation expectations anchored. Even when inflation initially rose, the public never lost confidence in central banks’ commitment and ability to bring inflation back to target. In countries with a history of high and volatile inflation, like many in Latin America, this is a clear success. It has helped to prevent a wage-price spiral similar to that experienced during previous episodes. Moreover, unlike in many episodes of the 1980s and 1990s, there was no financial or banking crisis.

    The job is not done, however. In much of the Americas, inflation remains above target. And the road back to price stability looks bumpier than it did even six months ago, not least due to heightened policy uncertainty. Over the past few years, central banks were able to draw on their accumulated credibility to limit the rise in inflation and bring it down at relatively little cost to economic activity. But to safeguard their credibility for the future, they have to see the job through and deliver on their mandates.

    Challenges ahead

    Let me spend the rest of my speech discussing some of the challenges that I believe will affect the conduct of monetary policy in the coming years.

    The first challenge is policy uncertainty. Trade policy is the most prominent example. But the future evolution of fiscal policy, regulation and immigration policy is also open to many questions at present. Moreover, the geopolitical backdrop remains in flux.

    Such pervasive policy uncertainty will affect central banks in several ways.

    Uncertainty itself is likely to weigh on growth. Firms will postpone investment. Households may avoid large purchases. In isolation, these effects would weigh on inflation.

    But an uncertain world is also likely to be a more volatile one, particularly for financial markets. Already in recent weeks, we have seen sizeable swings in asset prices, including exchange rates, as market participants struggled to determine how policy settings would evolve, and how to position themselves accordingly. Some of these asset price movements, particularly exchange rate depreciations, could be inflationary.

    At some point, of course, many of today’s policy uncertainties are likely to be resolved. Depending on the policies adopted, these choices will have their own consequences for growth and inflation.

    The second challenge is high public debt and, in some countries, unsustainable fiscal positions. Public debt was already high in much of the world before the Covid-19 pandemic. It has increased further since then. And the widening of budget deficits at the start of the pandemic has still not been fully unwound.

    Loose fiscal policy complicates the task of central banks in several, well known, ways. By contributing to aggregate demand, it adds to inflationary pressures, complicating the return to price stability. By raising doubts about the long-term sustainability of public finances it can increase interest rate risk premia and can lead to currency depreciation, further raising inflation while weighing on growth. In the extreme, an abrupt repricing of public debt could put financial stability at risk, especially in countries where banks and non-bank financial institutions hold large shares of the public debt. But even if these channels are familiar, central banks will still need to navigate the consequences.

    The third challenge is international divergence. As I mentioned before, the pandemic was a global shock, leading almost all central banks to ease policy at about the same time. The subsequent inflationary outbreak saw most tighten policy, even if many emerging market economy central banks started to do so ahead of their advanced economy peers.

    Going forward, economic conditions, and hence appropriate policy settings, are likely to be less synchronous. In particular, economic growth in the United States has been much stronger than in much of the rest of the world of late. Should this continue, we could see greater variability in policy settings, with flow-on effects to capital flows, exchange rates and global financial conditions.

    A fourth, and related, challenge is continued sluggish productivity growth in most countries of the Americas, except the United States. Some factors behind this problem are insufficient investment in infrastructure, education and technology. Many countries face structural inefficiencies, such as rigid labour markets and bureaucratic hurdles, which hinder businesses’ ability to innovate and expand. A retreat from globalisation and widening trade fragmentation could weigh on productivity growth further.

    Low productivity growth makes central banks’ lives much harder. In particular, it creates pressure to keep policy settings loose in order to sustain economic growth in the face of weak fundamentals. I don’t need to tell this audience that this policy prescription is all wrong.

    Addressing low productivity growth requires structural reforms that make it easier to open a business, compete and invest. Regrettably, structural reforms had been lagging in many economies well before the pandemic. Consolidating fiscal positions and rationalising public expenditure may also free up resources to improve public investment to develop necessary infrastructure and improve human capital. Such policies, of course, lie outside central banks’ toolkit.

    The task for central banks

    Faced with all of these challenges, many of which are beyond their control, what can central banks do?

    A first task is to ensure that at least one key prerequisite for sustained economic growth – price stability – is beyond question. In doing so, they can help remove one potentially destabilising source of policy uncertainty. The history of this region regrettably features many examples of the adverse consequences when the public loses confidence in central banks’ ability and willingness to achieve their mandates. The experience of the Covid pandemic showed us how much better outcomes can be if such confidence is maintained.

    That said, the specific policy settings to deliver monetary and financial stability are themselves uncertain. Much will depend upon how policy uncertainty evolves, and on the specific constellation of policies that are ultimately adopted. Appropriate policy settings will also change over time. In the meantime, bouts of market volatility are likely. At such times, central banks may need to act, in a judicious and limited manner, to safeguard market stability.

    So central banks will need to remain on their toes, be attuned to recent developments and stand ready to act firmly and decisively when required. While central banks’ ultimate objectives – monetary and financial stability – should be steadfast, commitment to specific policy settings should be avoided. Maintaining flexibility to adjust policy settings rapidly in response to changing circumstances will be at a premium.

    Beyond the immediate conjuncture, I believe the time is also opportune for central banks to build on the lessons of the past few years, in order to better prepare themselves for the future. The policy reviews currently being undertaken in a number of economies represent such an opportunity.

    In particular, a key lesson that I draw is how quickly and fundamentally seemingly pervasive features of the economic landscape can change. Before the pandemic, there was broad-based agreement that the global economy would face strong deflationary pressures for the foreseeable future. Real rates were expected to remain at historical lows, raising the risk of persistent liquidity traps.

    Today it is clear that inflation risks are much more two-sided than we had previously thought. And it is also clear that the general public is much more resentful of even a relatively brief period of high inflation than a prolonged period of modestly below-target inflation. Our policy frameworks should take these lessons into account. But they will also need to be robust to a future that could look very different from even the immediate past. A key reason for the success of many Latin American central banks in navigating the post-pandemic inflation surge was their ability to adapt rapidly in the face of changing circumstances. Such adaptability is a trait to which all policy frameworks aspire.

    Let me close with a plea for central bank cooperation. Central banking is not a zero-sum game. Above-target inflation or low growth in one country does not benefit others, but makes their life more difficult. This means there is significant scope for cooperation. It will be much easier to meet the challenges of tomorrow together than alone.

    The BIS will be there to support you in this endeavour. The BIS’s mission is to support central banks’ pursuit of monetary and financial stability through international cooperation, and to act as a bank for central banks. The BIS Representative Office for the Americas will continue to promote cooperation among central banks in the Americas and the Caribbean and to link central banks in the region to those in other regions.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: Ruble strengthened in December-January, shares of all sectors grew

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Central Bank of Russia –

    In December-January, the ruble rose against the US dollar by 9%, despite the growth of the American currency on the world market. The strengthening of the ruble occurred against the backdrop of adaptation to the new structure of foreign trade settlements after the sanctions imposed on Russian banks in November.

    At the end of 2024, the trend on the stock market changed: the decline in the Moscow Exchange Index observed in the second half of the year stopped. According to the results of December-January, its growth was 14.4%. At the same time, the volatility of the stock market decreased: the RVI index fell from 55.6 points at the beginning of December to 34.3 points at the end of January. OFZ yields began to decline after the December decision of the Bank of Russia to keep the key rate at 21%.

    Last year, gold in rubles rose in price by almost 45%, demonstrating the highest yield among Russian market instruments. Against the backdrop of high interest rates, money market funds and deposits, both in rubles and foreign currency, also showed yields higher than inflation.

    In January, the situation changed: the most profitable investments were shares of construction companies, which recouped last year’s decline. Gold and ruble deposits continued to yield above inflation, while deposits in US dollars and euros showed negative returns against the backdrop of the strengthening of the Russian currency.

    Read more in the next issue “Review of Financial Market Risks”.

    Preview photo: leungchopan / Shutterstock / Fotodom

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    HTTPS: //vv. KBR.ru/Press/Event/? ID = 23352

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Do investment tax breaks work? A new study finds the evidence is ‘mixed at best’

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kerrie Sadiq, Professor of Taxation, QUT Business School, and ARC Future Fellow, Queensland University of Technology

    The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) released a discussion paper this week on investment tax breaks. The study looks at whether tax incentives, such as instant asset write-offs for utes, boost business investment.

    Business investment is an important contributor to overall economic growth, and has been sluggish in recent years.

    The authors conclude the evidence for these tax breaks is “mixed at best”. They say that income tax breaks used during the global financial crisis increased investment significantly, however:

    [there is] no substantial evidence that other policies, including those implemented during the pandemic, increased investment.

    In an election year, further promises of tax breaks for businesses are likely. The Coalition has already announced a tax break for meals and entertainment. But are they a good idea, and at what cost do these promises come?

    Small business in Australia

    Small businesses with fewer than 20 employees make up 97% of all Australian businesses. More than 92% of Australian businesses have an annual turnover of less than A$2 million. It is these businesses that are doing it tough.

    These businesses are offered tax breaks for spending on capital assets such as equipment or vehicles. For the 2023-24 tax year, they can immediately write off the cost of eligible assets up to $20,000. In the May 2024 Budget, the government announced that the tax break would be extended to the 2024-25 tax year.

    When a small business is operated as a company, the base tax rate is 25%. This effectively means that the business still contributes 75% of the cost of the asset. This requires businesses to have the cash flow to invest. Even if there is cash flow, businesses may not want to spend on large purchases.

    It’s a question of trade-offs

    Investment tax breaks are also costly in terms of government tax revenue. Each year, the Treasury estimates the cost of tax breaks. These tax breaks are known as tax expenditures.

    For the 2023-34 tax year, the instant write-off tax break for small businesses is estimated to cost more than $4 billion by reducing taxes collected.

    Tax expenditures are normally designed to offer incentives to one group of taxpayers. However, they come at the expense of broader groups of taxpayers and at a cost of lost revenue to the government. This is money that could be spent through direct spending programs.

    Tax expenditures can be thought of as government spending programs hidden in plain sight.

    The true cost of tax breaks

    Tax expenditures play a central role in Australia’s collection of taxes and redistribution. During the pandemic, the instant asset write-off was increased to $150,000.

    The current government introduced the latest instant asset write-off to improve cash flow and reduce compliance costs for small business. As the RBA discussion paper notes, these types of incentives are also designed to encourage additional business investment.

    However, that study indicates this is not being achieved. They suggest the reasons may be the tax policies themselves or differences in the economic environment. Put simply, businesses may not want to invest.

    If the stated benefits are not realised, the result is less tax collected. Take the $4 billion cost above. Without the incentive, the government would have an additional $4 billion to spend. The $4 billion in 2023-24 could have been directed to funding small businesses through a direct spending program.

    Targeted programs

    The RBA discussion paper highlights the need to determine whether investment tax breaks achieve their intended benefits. Many factors must be considered, and assessing the influence on the economy is vital.

    However, evaluating these measures within the tax system means that important questions are not asked. This includes whether the benefits are distributed fairly, whether the program targets the right group of taxpayers, and whether there are unintended distorting effects.

    The latest Treasury Tax Expenditures and Insights Statement provides data on 307 separate measures. This number continues to grow.

    The government’s “Future Made in Australia” contains two examples. Its economic plan to support Australia’s transition to a net zero economy contains two tax incentives, one for hydrogen production and another for critical minerals.

    The proposed hydrogen production tax incentive is estimated at a cost to the budget of $6.7 billion over ten years. The measure will provide a $2 incentive per kilogram of renewable hydrogen produced for up to ten years. Eligible companies will get a credit against their income tax liability.

    The proposed critical minerals production tax incentive is estimated to cost the budget $7 billion over ten years. Eligible companies will get a refundable tax offset of 10% of certain expenses relating to processing and refining 31 critical minerals listed in Australia.

    Support for tax breaks

    Tax breaks for businesses, such as the immediate write-off, disproportionately benefit those that spend. Often, this is by design. If this is a government objective, supported by the general population, then it is viewed as a good use of public money.

    The same principle applies to tax breaks in the Government’s Future Made in Australia plan. A government objective is to transition to a net zero economy. A stated priority is to attract “investment to make Australia a leader in renewable energy, adding value to our natural resources and strengthening economic activity”.

    The question remains as to whether tax breaks are the best way to achieve this. The answer often changes when viewed as a direct spending program.

    Kerrie Sadiq currently receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She has previously received research grants from CPA and CAANZ.

    Ashesha Weerasinghe does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Do investment tax breaks work? A new study finds the evidence is ‘mixed at best’ – https://theconversation.com/do-investment-tax-breaks-work-a-new-study-finds-the-evidence-is-mixed-at-best-249148

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The transformation of Jordan Mailata: from rugby league in Sydney to a second NFL Super Bowl

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Keogh, Associate Dean of Research, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University

    Jordan Mailata is an Australian-born NFL star who plays for the Philadelphia Eagles as an offensive left tackle. This position favours very tall, heavy and strong athletes who also possess good footwork, agility and tactical awareness.

    His main job is to protect his quarterback and provide gaps for his running backs to run through.

    Mailata is one of four Australians to play in a Super Bowl, with the others being punters (kickers) Ben Graham, Arryn Siposs and Mitch Wishnowsky.

    Unfortunately, no Australian has won the game that matters most every year but Mailata has a chance in his second Super Bowl, against the Kansas City Chiefs on Monday morning.

    So, how did Mailata reach the pinnacle of his “new” sport?



    Read more:
    It’s the most American of sports, so why is the NFL looking to Melbourne for international games?

    A rugby league giant

    Mailata’s initial sporting success came in rugby league.

    He played in the Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs under-18 team and was offered a contract by the South Sydney Rabbitohs under-20 team. Both of these clubs are part of the elite National Rugby League (NRL) competition.

    Mailata, who still hadn’t reached his 21st birthday when offered the Rabbitohs contract, stood out as a giant even in professional rugby league circles at 203cm and 147 kilograms.

    But after fainting during a rugby league training session, he was diagnosed with a heart condition that required surgery. He then became even bigger, reportedly tipping the scales at close to 170kg.

    Ultimately, this resulted in some of the South Sydney staff and sport agents suggesting American football might be a better option for someone of his stature and physical capacities.

    Tranasferring his talent

    This brings us to what is known as “talent transfer”.

    In high-performance sport, talent transfer refers to a high-level athlete from one sport transferring to another based on their existing skills and physical capacities.

    This can be done for a number of reasons, like injury, burnout, loss of interest, or, in the case of Mailata, finding another sport that would suit their physicality better.

    Examples of talent transfer include sprinting to bobsleigh (Jana Pittman), rowing to cycling (Bridie O’Donnell and Rebecca Romero) or Sonny Bill Williams, who was highly successful at rugby league, rugby union and heavyweight boxing.

    For talent transfer to be successful, there needs to be a lot of similarities between the two sports in areas such as skill requirements (kicking, passing, tackling), physical traits (height, mass) and physiological demands (aerobic vs anaerobic).

    These similarities can allow athletes to capitalise on their previous training to succeed in their new sport faster and to a higher level than their competitors.

    The similarities between American football and rugby (league and union) – such as catching and kicking an oval-shaped ball, evading or running through defenders and full-body tackling – would have benefited a mature athlete like Mailata to transfer from one code to another.

    A whole new ball game

    His transition from a monster-sized rugby league player in Australia to a more regular-sized offensive tackle in the NFL was initially facilitated through the NFL International Player Pathway (IPP) program.

    The IPP was established in 2017 to provide high performance adult athletes from all over the world (like Mailata) the opportunity to learn the complexities of American football and increase the number of international players in the NFL.

    The program has been highly successful, with 37 international players signing with NFL teams, of which 18 are currently on NFL rosters.

    When Mailata was drafted to the NFL in 2018, he had to work on many aspects of his body to meet the physical challenges of playing in the NFL against other exceptionally massive and strong athletes.

    He also had to learn a range of sport-specific technical and tactical skills.

    As a part of the IPP, he started working with coaches including Jeff Stoutland, the Philadelphia Eagles offensive line coach.

    Stoutland took Mailata into the classroom, teaching him the intricacies of offensive line play including protection and run schemes. These lessons extended into what footwork patterns he would need to master, where and how to position his body when initiating contact and how to use his hands to control the defensive line.

    Such skills are the bread and butter of the offensive line – these athletes provide the quarterback time to make key passing decisions and increase the chance of their running backs making big yards on their carries.

    Mailata has also mentioned how Strickland taught him the importance of critically watching NFL games, initially to learn the technicalities of the sport and now to further refine his performance against the best defensive lines.

    The next wave

    In addition to the IPP that looks at talent transfer from adult athletes, the NFL has developed the NFL Academy for school-aged children.

    The first academy was based at Loughborough University in the United Kingdom and the second was developed at A.B. Patterson College on the Gold Coast.

    These academies combine full-time education with intensive American football training in the hope of promoting pathway opportunities at US colleges.

    Hopefully, these academies will see more young Australians transferring their skills and following Mailata into the NFL.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. The transformation of Jordan Mailata: from rugby league in Sydney to a second NFL Super Bowl – https://theconversation.com/the-transformation-of-jordan-mailata-from-rugby-league-in-sydney-to-a-second-nfl-super-bowl-248658

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Public Sector Banks (PSBs) show strong performance in the first three quarters (April-December) of current FY 2024-25

    Source: Government of India

    Public Sector Banks (PSBs) show strong performance in the first three quarters (April-December) of current FY 2024-25

    Highest-ever net profit of Rs 1.29 lakh crore reported by Public Sector Banks (PSBs) in the first nine months (April-December) of FY 2024-25, marking a 31.3% year-on-year growth                       

    PSBs achieve highest ever aggregate net profit, improved asset quality, robust business growth and adequate capital buffers

    Posted On: 06 FEB 2025 7:40PM by PIB Delhi

    The performance of Public Sector Banks  has shown significant improvement on key financial parameters during the first three quarters of the current FY 2024-25. Highlights as on 31.12.2024, are as under –

    • Record net profit growth of 31.3% (y-o-y) to achieve highest ever aggregate net profit of Rs. 1,29,426 Crore and aggregate operating profit of Rs. 2,20,243 Crore, in first nine months of the financial year.
    • Improved asset quality visible from significantly low Net NPA ratio at 0.59% (Aggregate net NPA outstanding of Rs. 61,252 Crore)
    • Aggregate business growth of 11.0% (y-o-y), with improved aggregate deposit growth at 9.8% (y-o-y). Total aggregate business of PSBs reached Rs. 242.27 lakh crore.
    • Robust credit growth of 12.4%, led by retail credit growth of 16.6%, agriculture credit growth of 12.9% and MSME credit growth of 12.5%.
    • Built-up of adequate capital buffers, with Aggregate Capital to Risk Weighted Assets Ratio of 14.83%, significantly above the minimum requirement of 11.5%.

     

    PSBs are adequately capitalized and well poised to meet credit demands of all sectors of the economy, with special thrust on Agriculture, MSME and Infrastructure Sector.

    The policy and process reforms have resulted in enhanced systems and processes for credit discipline, recognition and resolution of stressed assets, responsible lending, improved governance, financial inclusion initiatives, technology adoption etc.  These measures have led to a sustained financial health and robustness of banking sector as a whole which is reflected in the current performance of the PSBs.

    ******

    NB/AD    

    (Release ID: 2100412) Visitor Counter : 83

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: A New Dawn for Rural India’s Transformation

    Source: Government of India

    A New Dawn for Rural India’s Transformation

    Union Budget 2025-26 Brings Forward a Package of Hope

    Posted On: 06 FEB 2025 7:32PM by PIB Delhi

    Union Budget 2025-26 Brings Forward a Package of Hope

    “Ensuring a dignified life for the people of rural India is the priority of my Government”

    ~Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi

     

    India is home to 6.65 lakh villages, with 2.68 lakh Gram Panchayats and Rural Local Bodies, which form the backbone of the nation’s rural landscape. These villages, scattered across the country, play a crucial role in shaping India’s rural economy and culture. The Union Budget 2025-26 recognizes the importance of these communities and places a strong emphasis on their upliftment. The budget focuses on key areas such as employment generation, women empowerment, education and infrastructure development in rural India.

    Total amount allocated for the demand in the Budget Estimate (BE) for 2025-26: ₹1,88,754.53 Cr.

    The Union Budget 2025-26 outlines several key initiatives aimed at driving rural development and enhancing prosperity through focused programs and investments:

     

    1. Water Supply – Jal Jeevan Mission:

    The Jal Jeevan Mission has been extended until 2028 with an increased focus on improving the quality of infrastructure and the operation and maintenance of rural piped water supply schemes through a citizen-centric approach, known as “Jan Bhagidhari”. The goal is to achieve 100% coverage with enhanced financial support and sustainability through state-specific MoUs.

    1. Broadband Connectivity – Bharatnet Project:

    Broadband connectivity will be expanded under the Bharatnet Project, aiming to provide all government secondary schools and primary health centers in rural areas with internet access, improving education and healthcare services.

    1. India Post as a Catalyst for Rural Economy:

     India Post will drive rural economic growth with its 1.5 lakh rural post offices, India Post Payment Bank, and 2.4 lakh Dak Sevaks. It will enhance services by offering micro-enterprise credit, digital services, and institutional account management. Furthermore, India Post will evolve into a key public logistics organization supporting entrepreneurs, MSMEs, and self-help groups.

    1. Rural Prosperity and Resilience Program:

    A comprehensive multi-sectoral ‘Rural Prosperity and Resilience’ programme will be launched in collaboration with states. This program aims to address under-employment in agriculture by promoting skill development, technology adoption, and investments to invigorate the rural economy. The mission will focus on empowering rural women, young farmers, marginalized communities, and landless families, ensuring that migration becomes a choice, not a necessity.

    Through these initiatives, the Union Budget 2025-26 envisions a holistic approach to rural development, aiming for long-term growth, resilience, and self-reliance across rural India.

    Positive Transformations in Rural India

    Positive outcomes have been observed across various sectors as India moves toward greater prosperity. These include an increase in rural wages, wider internet connectivity in rural areas, a decline in poverty, and a reduction in consumption inequality.

    • National Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) Report: The proportion of individuals living in multidimensional poverty declined from 24.85% to 14.96% between 2015-16 and 2019-21. 13.5 crore individuals escaped multidimensional poverty during this period.
    • Rural Internet Connectivity: As of March 2024, India had 954.40 million internet subscribers. Out of this, 398.35 million were rural internet subscribers.
    • Income Distribution (Gini Coefficient): For rural areas, it declined from 0.266 in FY22-23 to 0.237 in FY23-24.
    • Rural Wage Growth: As per data from the Labour Bureau, rural wages in FY25 (April-September 2024) showed a growth of above 4% each month year-on-year: Agriculture wages grew by 5.7% for men and 7% for women. Non-agricultural wages grew by 5.5% for men and 7.9% for women.

    Pathway to Prosperity: Key Rural Scheme Achievements

    • Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY) – Roads: Launched in December 2000, this initiative aims to provide rural connectivity through a single all-weather road to unconnected habitations of a designated population size in the core network, enhancing the socio-economic conditions of rural communities.
    • Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana-Gramin (PMAY-G) – Housing: Launched on 20th November 2016, aiming to provide housing for the poorest segments of society.

    Mission Amrit Sarovar: Launched on 24th April 2022, with an objective to conserve water for the future. The Mission aimed at developing / rejuvenating 75 Amrit Sarovar (Pond) in each district of the Country. A total of 68,843 ponds have been constructed.

     

    National Rural Health Mission: Launched in 2005 with the objective of building public health systems to provide accessible, affordable and quality health care to the rural population.

    1. Jal Jeevan Mission: Launched in 2019, JJM is a nationwide programme designed to provide all households in rural India with safe and adequate drinking-water through individual household tap connections. As of 27 January 2025, a total of 12.2 crore households have been provided with tap water connections.
    1. Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin): Launched on October 2, 2014, the initiative aimed at making India Open Defecation Free (ODF). Currently in Phase 2 the focus is on maintaining the ODF status, managing solid and liquid waste by 2024-25 and transitioning all villages from ODF to the ODF Plus model.

    Saansad Adarsh Gram Yojana (SAGY): Launched on 11th October 2014, SAGY aims to preserve the essence of rural India by providing access to basic amenities and opportunities for people to shape their own futures.

    1. Pradhan Mantri Janjati Adivasi Nyaya Maha Abhiyan (PM-JANMAN): Cabinet Approved PM-JANMAN on Nov. 2023 to improve socio-economic conditions of the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs).
    1. Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana – National Rural Livelihoods Mission (DAY-NRLM): Launched in 2011, the scheme aims to empower rural poor women by organizing them into Self Help Groups (SHGs) and supporting economic activities to improve their income and quality of life. Implemented in 5,369 blocks across 682 districts.
    2. Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008: Provide access to justice at the grassroots level in rural areas. As of October 2024, 313 Gram Nyayalayas have disposed of over 2.99 lakh cases between December 2020 and October 2024.
    1. National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP): Launched on 15th August 1995, Provide financial assistance to vulnerable sections of society.

     

    1. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) Progress: Launched in 2005, the scheme aims to provide 100 days of guaranteed wage employment annually to rural households, enhancing livelihood security through unskilled manual work. The Budget allocation under Mahatma Gandhi NREGA has steadily risen. The budget allocation for the financial year 2006-07 was Rs 11,300 crore which increased to Rs 33,000 crore in 2013-14 and now stands at Rs 86,000 crore during FY 2024-25 at Budget estimate stage.

    ​​​​​​​

    Conclusion

    Rural India is making significant strides toward achieving a developed India by 2047, with the Union Budget serving as a key step in making it more self-reliant (Atmanirbhar). By focusing on essential areas like employment, infrastructure, and economic empowerment, the budget ensures crucial support for a prosperous and sustainable future for rural communities, paving the way for a stronger, more self-sufficient India.

     

    References

    Click here to see in PDF

    Santosh Kumar/ Sarla Meena/ Kamna Lakaria

    (Release ID: 2100410) Visitor Counter : 22

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI: Skyline Bankshares, Inc. Announces Fourth Quarter 2024 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    FLOYD, Va. and INDEPENDENCE, Va., Feb. 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Skyline Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) (OTC QX: SLBK) – the holding company for Skyline National Bank (the “Bank”) – announced its results of operations for the fourth quarter of 2024.

    As previously announced, the Company acquired Johnson County Bank (“JCB”) on September 1, 2024, with the Company as the surviving corporation. For accounting purposes, the Company is considered the acquiror and JCB is considered the acquiree in the transaction. As such, all information contained herein as of and for periods prior to September 1, 2024 reflects the operations of the Company prior to the merger.

    The Company recorded net income of $2.5 million, or $0.45 per share, for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to net income of $1.1 million, or $0.19 per share, for the third quarter of 2024 and net income of $2.2 million, or $0.39 per share, for the same period in 2023. For the year ended December 31, 2024, net income was $7.4 million, or $1.34 per share, compared to net income of $9.7 million, or $1.74 per share, for the year ended December 31, 2023. Fourth quarter 2024 earnings represented an annualized return on average assets (“ROAA”) of 0.82% and an annualized return on average equity (“ROAE”) of 11.23%, compared to 0.83% and 11.05%, respectively, for the same period last year. Excluding nonrecurring merger-related expenses of $923 thousand relating to the acquisition of Johnson County Bank, net income would have been $3.2 million, or $0.58 per share, for the fourth quarter of 2024. This would represent an annualized ROAA and ROAE of 1.06% and 14.54%, respectively, for the fourth quarter of 2024.

    President and CEO Blake Edwards stated, “The fourth quarter of 2024 was marked by many notable accomplishments. Earnings were strong, especially when adjusted for direct merger-related costs, with an adjusted annualized ROAA of 1.06%. During the quarter our core loan growth was $31.4 million, which is an annualized rate of 13.13%. Our net interest income increased in both the three-month and twelve-month periods ended December 31, 2024, while our net interest margin increased to 4.10% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to 3.78% for the quarter ended September 30, 2024. Net income also increased from the third to the fourth quarter when adjusted for nonrecurring, merger-related costs.”

    Edwards continued, “We continued the integration of Johnson County Bank during the fourth quarter of 2024 with the core data systems conversion completed in November. Our experienced team worked tirelessly to make this transition as seamless as possible for the Johnson County employees and customers alike. This is an exciting chapter in the history of our bank, and we are excited to bring our commitment to excellence and dedication to the businesses and people of Johnson County, Tennessee. We look forward to creating a positive impact in Tennessee while continuing to offer an unmatched customer experience in our existing markets. I believe we remain well positioned for growth and success in the future and know that our employees will continue to deliver on our brand promise of being “Always our Best” for our customers each and every day.”

    Highlights

    • In connection with the acquisition of JCB, effective September 1, 2024, the Company acquired $154.1 million in assets at fair value, including $87.2 million in loans. The Company also assumed $133.8 million of liabilities at fair value, including $125.3 million of total deposits with a core deposit intangible asset recorded of $3.4 million, and goodwill of $4.6 million.
    • Net income was $2.5 million, or $0.45 per share, in the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to $2.2 million, or $0.39 per share, in the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Net interest margin (“NIM”) was 4.10% for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to 3.78% in the third quarter of 2024, and 3.69% in the fourth quarter of 2023.
    • Total assets increased $171.8 million, or 16.42%, to $1.22 billion at December 31, 2024 from $1.05 billion at December 31, 2023.
    • Net loans were $976.4 million at December 31, 2024, an increase of $165.5 million, or 20.40%, when compared to $811.0 million at December 31, 2023. Excluding the $87.2 million in loans acquired as part of the JCB merger, gross loans increased by $79.6 million, or 9.73%, for the year 2024.
    • Total deposits were $1.09 billion at December 31, 2024, an increase of $163.5 million, or 17.60%, from $928.7 million at December 31, 2023. Excluding the $125.3 million of total deposits acquired as part of the JCB merger, total deposits increased by $38.2 million, or 4.11%, during the year 2024.
    • During the quarter, the Company incurred $923 thousand in merger-related expenses related to the acquisition of JCB. Excluding these merger-related expenses, net income would have been $3.2 million, or $0.58 per share, for the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Fourth Quarter and Year Ended December 31, 2024 Income Statement Review

    Net interest income after provision for credit losses in the fourth quarter of 2024 was $11.4 million compared to $8.9 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Total interest income was $15.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, representing an increase of $3.7 million, or 31.67%, in comparison to the fourth quarter of 2023. Interest income on loans increased in the quarterly comparison by $3.7 million, primarily due to organic loan growth, and the addition of loan balances from the JCB acquisition which added approximately $87.2 million. Management anticipates this loan growth will continue to have a positive impact on both earning assets and loan yields. Interest expense on deposits increased by $1.2 million in the quarterly comparison as a result of rate increases on deposit offerings, and the additional interest-bearing deposits from the JCB acquisition. Management anticipates interest expense on deposits could increase in the near term as competitive pressures for deposits may result in continued increases in rates on deposit offerings, especially on time deposits. Interest on borrowings decreased by $121 thousand in the quarterly comparison.

    For the year ended December 31, 2024, net interest income after provision for (recovery of) credit losses was $38.4 million compared to $35.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Interest income increased by $10.2 million, primarily due to an increase of $10.1 million in interest income on loans. Interest expense on deposits increased by $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared to the same period last year. As previously discussed, this is a reflection of the increased competitive pressures for deposits as well as the additional interest-bearing deposits from the JCB acquisition. Interest on borrowings increased by $266 thousand in the year-over-year comparison, due to short-term borrowings to help fund loan growth.

    Fourth quarter 2024 noninterest income was $2.1 million compared with $1.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Service charges and fees increased by $263 thousand in the quarterly comparison.

    For the year ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, noninterest income was $7.3 million and $7.0 million, respectively. Included in noninterest income for the year 2024 was $221 thousand from life insurance contracts and a net realized security loss of $141 thousand. The net security loss resulted from the recognition of unamortized premiums on a called bond. Included in noninterest income for the year 2023 was income of $129 thousand related to loan hedge fees from a correspondent bank that was recorded in other income, a $197 thousand gain on a sale leaseback, $69 thousand from life insurance contracts and security losses of $16 thousand. Excluding these items noninterest income increased by $614 thousand in the year-over-year comparison, primarily as a result on an increase in service charges and fees of $502 thousand and an increase of $22 thousand in mortgage origination fees.

    Noninterest expense in the fourth quarter of 2024 was $10.3 million compared with $7.9 million in the fourth quarter of 2023, an increase of $2.4 million, or 30.22%. Salary and benefit costs increased by $489 thousand due to the increase in employees resulting from the JCB acquisition, combined with routine personnel additions and salary adjustments, as well as increased benefit costs. Occupancy and equipment expenses increased $134 thousand and data processing increased by $330 thousand in the quarterly comparisons primarily due to branch expansion costs and the costs associated with running two core processing systems before the core conversion for Johnson County Bank occurred. Also included in noninterest expense in the fourth quarter of 2024 was $923 thousand in merger-related expenses related to the acquisition of Johnson County Bank.

    For the year ended December 31, 2024, total noninterest expenses increased by $5.7 million compared to the same period in 2023, primarily due to employee costs and branch costs discussed above. Salary and benefit cost increased by $1.1 million. Occupancy and equipment expenses increased by $604 thousand, and data processing increased by $788 thousand in the year-over-year comparison. Merger-related expenses related to the acquisition of Johnson County Bank were $2.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2024.

    Net income before taxes increased by $364 thousand in the quarterly comparison causing an increase in income tax expense of $16 thousand. In the year-over-year comparison, net income before taxes decreased by $2.7 million, resulting in a decrease in income tax expense of $443 thousand.

    Balance Sheet Review

    Total assets increased in the fourth quarter of 2024 by $11.1 million, or 0.92%, to $1.22 billion at December 31, 2024 from $1.21 billion at September 30, 2024, and increased by $171.8 million, or 16.42%, from $1.05 billion at December 31, 2023. Total loans increased during the fourth quarter by $31.3 million, or 3.29%, to $984.5 million at December 31, 2024 from $953.1 million at September 30, 2024, and increased by $166.8 million, or 20.39%, compared to $817.7 million at December 31, 2023. Core loan growth was $31.4 million during the fourth quarter of 2024, which is an annualized rate of 13.13%.

    Asset quality has remained strong, with a ratio of nonperforming loans to total loans of 0.26% at December 31, 2024 compared to 0.21% at December 31, 2023. The allowance for credit losses remained comparable at approximately 0.82% of total loans as of December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively.

    Investment securities decreased by $5.6 million during the fourth quarter to $118.3 million at December 31, 2024 from $123.9 million at September 30, 2024, and decreased by $9.1 million from $127.4 million at December 31, 2023. The decrease in the fourth quarter of 2024 was the result of $1.5 million in paydowns, and an increase in unrealized losses of $4.1 million because of the changes in interest rates during the quarter.

    Total deposits increased in the fourth quarter of 2024 by $6.3 million, or 0.58%, to $1.09 billion at December 31, 2024 from $1.09 billion at September 30, 2024, and increased $163.5 million, or 17.60%, compared to $928.7 million at December 31, 2023. Noninterest bearing deposits decreased by $2.4 million and interest-bearing deposits increased by $8.7 million during the quarter. Lower cost interest bearing deposits increased by $8.0 million during the quarter, and time deposits increased by $689 thousand. Excluding the $125.3 million of total deposits acquired as part of the JCB merger, total deposits increased by $38.2 million, or 4.11%, during the year 2024.

    Total stockholders’ equity increased by $45 thousand, or 0.05%, to $88.7 million at December 31, 2024, from $88.6 million three months earlier, and increased $5.8 million, or 6.98%, from $82.9 million at December 31, 2023. The change during the quarter was due to earnings of $2.5 million offset by $2.7 million in other comprehensive losses.

    Forward-looking statements

    This release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Act of 1934 as amended. These include statements as to expectations regarding future financial performance and any other statements regarding future results or expectations. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are including this statement for purposes of these safe harbor provisions. Forward-looking statements, which are based on certain assumptions and describe future plans, strategies, and expectations of the Company, are generally identified by the use of words such as “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” or “project” or similar expressions. Our ability to predict results, or the actual effect of future plans or strategies, is inherently uncertain. Factors which could have a material adverse effect on the operations and future prospects of the Company and its subsidiaries include, but are not limited to: changes in interest rates; general economic and financial market conditions; the effect of changes in banking, tax and other laws and regulations and interpretations or guidance thereunder; monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, including policies of the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board; the quality and composition of the loan and securities portfolios; demand for loan products; deposit flows; competition; demand for financial services in the Company’s market area; the implementation of new technologies; the ability to develop and maintain secure and reliable electronic systems; accounting principles, policies, and guidelines; disruptions to customer and employee relationships and business operations caused by the Johnson County Bank acquisition; the ability to implement integration plans associated with the acquisition, which integration may be more difficult, time-consuming or costly than expected; the ability to achieve the cost savings and synergies contemplated by the acquisition within the expected timeframe, or at all; and other factors identified in Item 1A, “Risk Factors,” in the Company’s Annual Report on 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023 and the Company’s most recently filed Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements. We undertake no obligation to update or clarify these forward‐looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

    (See Attached Financial Statements for quarter ending December 31, 2024)

    Skyline Bankshares, Inc.
    Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
    December 31, 2024; September 30, 2024; December 31, 2023

      December 31,
    		     September 30,
    		     December 31,
    		  
    (dollars in thousands except share amounts) 2024
    		     2024
    		     2023
    		  
      (Unaudited)
    		     (Unaudited)
    		     (Audited)
    		  
    Assets                      
    Cash and due from banks $ 17,889     $ 27,862     $ 16,811  
    Interest-bearing deposits with banks   1,562       6,766       4,808  
    Federal funds sold   –       536       474  
    Investment securities available for sale   118,287       123,906       127,389  
    Restricted equity securities   4,034       4,235       3,338  
    Loans   984,459       953,122       817,704  
    Allowance for credit losses   (8,027 )     (7,787 )     (6,739 )
    Net loans   976,432       945,335       810,965  
    Cash value of life insurance   26,743       26,558       22,909  
    Other real estate owned   140       140       –  
    Properties and equipment, net   34,663       33,741       31,183  
    Accrued interest receivable   4,013       3,810       3,463  
    Core deposit intangible   3,815       4,031       917  
    Goodwill   7,900       7,900       3,257  
    Deferred tax assets, net   5,593       5,125       5,046  
    Other assets   16,528       16,555       15,283  
    Total assets $ 1,217,599     $ 1,206,500     $ 1,045,843  
               
    Liabilities          
    Deposits          
    Noninterest-bearing $ 337,918     $ 340,340     $ 305,115  
    Interest-bearing   754,285       745,567       623,627  
    Total deposits   1,092,203       1,085,907       928,742  
               
    Borrowings   29,254       25,000       27,500  
    Accrued interest payable   950       979       531  
    Other liabilities   6,524       5,991       6,188  
    Total liabilities   1,128,931       1,117,877       962,961  
               
    Stockholders’ Equity          
    Common stock and surplus   33,507       33,283       33,356  
    Retained earnings   73,714       71,212       68,866  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (18,553 )     (15,872 )     (19,340 )
    Total stockholders’ equity   88,668       88,623       82,882  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 1,217,599     $ 1,206,500     $ 1,045,843  
    Book value per share $ 15.69     $ 15.72     $ 14.84  
    Tangible book value per share(1) $ 13.62     $ 13.60     $ 14.09  
               
               
    Asset Quality Indicators          
    Nonperforming assets to total assets   0.22 %     0.15 %     0.17 %
    Nonperforming loans to total loans   0.26 %     0.18 %     0.21 %
    Allowance for credit losses to total loans   0.82 %     0.82 %     0.82 %
    Allowance for credit losses to nonperforming loans   313.19 %     453.00 %     389.31 %
    (1) Tangible book value is a Non-GAAP financial measure defined as stockholders’ equity less goodwill and other intangible assets, divided by shares outstanding, that the Company believes is a meaningful measure of capital adequacy because it provides a meaningful base for period-to-period and company-to-company comparisons, which the Company believes will assist investors in assessing the capital of the Company and its ability to absorb potential losses. See “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” at the end of this release.
       

    Skyline Bankshares, Inc.
    Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations

      Three Months Ended
    		   Year Ended
      December 31,     September 30,     December 31,     December 31,  
    (dollars in thousands except share amounts) 2024     2024     2023     2024     2023  
      (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)     (Audited)  
    Interest income                            
    Loans and fees on loans $ 14,541     $ 12,759     $ 10,843     $ 49,974     $ 39,877  
    Interest-bearing deposits in banks 92     150     68     390     279  
    Federal funds sold 4     25     3     37     29  
    Interest on securities 692     737     743     2,871     3,024  
    Dividends 109     41     68     264     156  
      15,438     13,712     11,725     53,536     43,365  
    Interest expense                            
    Deposits 3,601     3,407     2,360     12,650     6,617  
    Interest on borrowings 268     374     389     1,416     1,150  
      3,869     3,781     2,749     14,066     7,767  
    Net interest income 11,569     9,931     8,976     39,470     35,598  
                                 
    Provision for (Recovery of) credit losses 214     738     69     1,116     (50 )
    Net interest income after provision for (recovery of) credit losses 11,355     9,193     8,907     38,354     35,648  
                                 
    Noninterest income                            
    Service charges on deposit accounts 624     598     580     2,317     2,186  
    Other service charges and fees 1,146     940     927     3,844     3,473  
    Net realized losses on securities –     –     –     (141 )   (16 )
    Mortgage origination fees 68     108     66     277     255  
    Increase in cash value of life insurance 185     161     138     643     576  
    Life insurance income –     –     –     221     69  
    Other income 42     44     48     124     427  
      2,065     1,851     1,759     7,285     6,970  
    Noninterest expenses                            
    Salaries and employee benefits 4,576     4,525     4,087     17,770     16,704  
    Occupancy and equipment 1,445     1,387     1,311     5,636     5,032  
    Data processing expense 940     744     610     3,019     2,231  
    FDIC Assessments 279     153     143     720     588  
    Advertising 252     256     219     965     768  
    Bank franchise tax 136     132     61     466     376  
    Director fees 148     52     150     326     349  
    Professional fees 276     188     194     856     722  
    Telephone expense 120     117     155     473     556  
    Core deposit intangible amortization 216     107     80     482     369  
    Merger-related expenses 923     1,143     –     2,423     –  
    Other expense 987     821     898     3,145     2,847  
      10,298     9,625     7,908     36,281     30,542  
    Net income before income taxes 3,122     1,419     2,758     9,358     12,076  
                                 
    Income tax expense 619     362     603     1,933     2,376  
    Net income $ 2,503     $ 1,057     $ 2,155     $ 7,425     $ 9,700  
                                 
    Net income per share $ 0.45     $ 0.19     $ 0.39     $ 1.34     $ 1.74  
    Weighted average shares outstanding 5,557,156     5,553,579     5,561,075     5,557,210     5,579,654  
    Dividends declared per share $ 0.00     $ 0.23     $ 0.00     $ 0.46     $ 0.42  
                                 

    Skyline Bankshares, Inc.
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    In addition to financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), the Company uses certain non-GAAP financial measures that provide useful information for financial and operational decision making, evaluating trends, and understanding the Company’s financial condition, capital position and financial results. Non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and not a substitute for, or more important than, financial measures prepared in accordance with GAAP and may not be comparable to those reported by other financial institutions. The non-GAAP financial measure presented in this document includes tangible book value per share, and the following items adjusted for merger-related expenses: return on average assets, return on average equity, and net income per share. For periods that are shorter than twelve months, the Company annualizes net income for the return on average assets and the return on average equity. The following tables present calculations underlying non-GAAP financial measures.

               
      December 31,     September 30,     December 31,  
    (dollars in thousands except share amounts) 2024     2024     2023  
      (Unaudited)
    		     (Unaudited)
    		     (Unaudited)
    		  
    Tangible Common Equity          
    Total stockholders’ equity (GAAP) $ 88,668     $ 88,623     $ 82,882  
    Less: Goodwill   (7,900 )     (7,900 )     (3,257 )
    Less: Core deposit intangible           (3,815 )             (4,031 )             (917 )
    Tangible common equity (non-GAAP) $         76,953     $         76,692     $         78,708  
    Common stock shares outstanding           5,651,704               5,639,204               5,584,204  
    Tangible book value per share $         13.62     $         13.60     $         14.09  
               
      Three Months Ended
    		     Year Ended
    		  
      December 31,     September 30,     December 31,     December 31,
    		  
    (dollars in thousands except share amounts) 2024     2024     2023     2024     2023  
      (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)     (Unaudited)  
    Annualized Net Income                                      
    Net income (GAAP) $ 2,503     $ 1,057     $ 2,155     $ 7,425     $ 9,700  
    Add: Items not annualized                                      
    Merger-related expenses   923       1,143       –       2,423       –  
    Tax effect of merger-related expenses           (184 )             (212 )             –                (407 )             –  
    Total non-annualized items           739               931               –               2,016               –  
    Adjusted net income $         3,242     $         1,988     $         2,155     $         9,441     $         9,700  
                                           
    Adjusted net income, annualized for ratio calculation (non-GAAP) $         12,898     $         7,909     $         8,550     $         9,441     $         9,700  
                                           
    Net income, annualized for ratio calculation $         9,958     $         4,205     $         8,550     $         7,425     $         9,700  
                                           
    Average total assets $         1,213,167     $         1,123,844     $         1,032,307     $         1,109,465     $         1,012,827  
    Average total equity $         88,684     $         87,292     $         77,352     $         85,460     $         76,598  
    Weighted average shares outstanding           5,557,156               5,553,579               5,561,075               5,557,210               5,579,654  
                                           
    Return on average assets (GAAP)   0.82 %     0.37 %     0.83 %     0.67 %     0.96 %
    Adjusted return on average assets (non-GAAP)   1.06 %     0.70 %     0.83 %     0.85 %     0.96 %
                                           
    Return on average equity (GAAP)   11.23 %     4.82 %     11.05 %     8.69 %     12.66 %
    Adjusted return on average equity (non-GAAP)   14.54 %     9.06 %     11.05 %     11.05 %     12.66 %
                                           
    Net income per share $         0.45     $         0.19     $         0.39     $         1.34     $         1.74  
    Adjusted net income per share $         0.58     $         0.36     $         0.39     $         1.70     $         1.74  
                                           

    For more information contact:
    Blake Edwards, President & CEO – 276-773-2811
    Lori Vaught, EVP & CFO – 276-773-2811

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Italy: EIB provides €30 million to improve water service efficiency and resilience in Pescara

    Source: European Investment Bank

    • The first €20 million tranche of a green loan for Azienda Comprensoriale Acquedottistica S.p.A (ACA) has been signed.
    • The InvestEU-backed financing will help provide wider and more reliable access to water and optimise wastewater management.
    • The EIB is one of the world’s leading lenders to the water sector.

    The European Investment Bank (EIB) has announced a €30 million loan to Azienda Comprensoriale Acquedottistica S.p.A (ACA), the utility company providing integrated water services to around 450 000 people in the Italian provinces of Pescara, Chieti and Teramo. The first €20 million tranche was signed by the Head of the EIB Local Office in Italy, Milena Messori, and by the CEO of ACA, Giovanna Brandelli. This InvestEU-backed financing will support ACA’s water and wastewater investment programme for 2024-2026.

    This is the first EIB green loan to be granted to a business in Abruzzo. EIB green loans go to projects focusing on sustainability, climate action and environmental protection. Key initiatives set to receive financing include expanding the water network to provide wider and more reliable access to water, and introducing advanced technologies for better water quality and wastewater management. In parallel, solutions will be implemented to optimise operational processes, cutting costs and increasing the overall efficiency of the water system.

    The focus on improving the sector’s resilience to future extreme climate events will strengthen the region’s ability to face droughts and water crises like the one that hit Abruzzo in 2024. This project will have a positive impact not only on the management of water resources, but also on people’s quality of life.

    The agreement is part of the existing partnership between the EIB and the city of Pescara, which in March 2022 saw the signature of €35 million in financing for the renewal of waste sorting facilities, the purchase of low environmental impact vehicles and the improvement of energy efficiency in schools and public buildings.

    “This agreement reaffirms our commitment to Italian utility companies and to the improvement of water infrastructure in Italy. With InvestEU backing, we are helping ACA Pescara to cut water losses, improve efficiency and provide high-quality water services, even when confronted with climate change-related challenges, said the Head of the EIB Local Office in Italy, Milena Messori.”

    “This is the first EIB green loan to be granted to a business in Abruzzo, said the CEO of ACA, Giovanna Brandelli. This €30 million loan to ACA will hugely improve the region’s water network and provide a better service in the coming years. This is the first time that ACA has received such financing like this from a prestigious bank like the EIB. This shows that the path taken by the company is starting to bear fruit and is having a positive impact on the service provided. The focus on improving the sector’s resilience to future extreme climate events will strengthen the region’s ability to face droughts and water crises like the one that hit Abruzzo in 2024”.

    Italy receives more EIB resources for the water sector than any other country

    With over 1 640 projects and around €84 billion in financing provided since 1958, the EIB is one of the world’s leading lenders to the water sector. In the last ten years, Italy has received more EIB resources for the water sector than anywhere else, seeing operations financed totalling more than €4 billion. This is ACA Pescara’s first EIB loan, and comes in addition to recently announced financing for Iren (€200 million), Valle Umbra Servizi (€35 million), ETRA (€100 million), Acquedotto Pugliese (€270 million), Como Acqua (€50 million), Hera Group (€460 million), ACEA (€435 million), Acque (€130 million) and CIIP (€50 million).

    Background information

    The European Investment Bank (ElB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union, owned by its Member States. Founded on eight key priorities, it finances investments that contribute to EU policy objectives, bolstering climate action, environmental protection, digitalisation and technological innovation, security and defence, agriculture and bioeconomy, social infrastructure, the capital markets union, and supports a stronger Europe in a more peaceful and prosperous world. All projects financed by the EIB Group are in line with the Paris Climate Agreement, as pledged in our Climate Bank Roadmap. Around 60% of the EIB Group’s annual financing supports projects directly contributing to climate change mitigation, adaptation, and a healthier environment.

    The EIB Group, which also includes the European Investment Fund (EIF), signed a total of around €89 billion in new financing for over 900 projects in 2024, which boosted Europe’s competitiveness and security. Promoting the integration of markets and mobilising investments, the funds unleashed by the EIB Group in 2024 attracted investment worth over €100 billion, fostering Europe’s energy security and unlocking €110 billion to support startups, scale-ups and pioneering firms in Europe. Around half of the EIB’s financing within the European Union goes to cohesion regions, where per capita income is lower than the EU average. The EIB Group signed 99 operations totalling €10.98 billion in Italy in 2024, helping to unlock almost €37 billion of investment in the real economy.

    The InvestEU programme provides the European Union with long-term funding by leveraging substantial private and public funds in support of a sustainable recovery. It also helps to crowd in private investment for the European Union’s strategic priorities such as the European Green Deal and the digital transition. InvestEU brings all EU financial instruments previously available for supporting investments within the European Union together under one roof, making funding for investment projects in Europe simpler, more efficient and more flexible. The programme consists of three components: the InvestEU Fund, the InvestEU Advisory Hub, and the InvestEU Portal. The InvestEU Fund is deployed through implementing partners that will invest in projects using the EU budget guarantee of €26.2 billion. The entire budget guarantee will back the investment projects of the implementing partners, increase their risk-bearing capacity and thus mobilise at least €372 billion in additional investment.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Final draft agenda – Tuesday, 11 February 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    Final draft agenda
    Strasbourg
    Monday, 10 February 2025 – Thursday, 13 February 2025  
    Tuesday, 11 February 2025   Version: Thursday, 6 February 2025, 13:39

    09:00 – 11:50   Debates     
    Council (including replies) 20′
    Commission (including replies) 20′
    “Catch the eye”   (2×5′) 10′
    Members 104′
    13:00 – 22:00   Debates (or at the end of the votes)     
    Council (including replies) 50′
    Commission (including replies) 65′
    Author (committee) 5′
    “Catch the eye”   (7×5′) 35′
    Members 239′

    32 Continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia’s war of aggression
    17 European Central Bank – annual report 2024
    Anouk Van Brug (A10-0003/2025) 
        – Amendments Wednesday, 5 February 2025, 13:00
    50 Escalation of violence in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo
        – Motion for a resolution Monday, 10 February 2025, 19:00
        – Amendments to motions for resolutions; joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 February 2025, 19:00
        – Amendments to joint motions for resolutions Tuesday, 11 February 2025, 20:00
        – Requests for “separate”, “split” and “roll-call” votes Wednesday, 12 February 2025, 16:00
    Separate votes – Split votes – Roll-call votes
    Texts put to the vote on Tuesday Friday, 7 February 2025, 12:00
    Texts put to the vote on Wednesday Monday, 10 February 2025, 19:00
    Texts put to the vote on Thursday Tuesday, 11 February 2025, 19:00
    Motions for resolutions concerning debates on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Rule 150) Wednesday, 12 February 2025, 19:00

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Final draft agenda – Monday, 10 February 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    17 European Central Bank – annual report 2024
    Anouk Van Brug (A10-0003/2025) 
        – Amendments Wednesday, 5 February 2025, 13:00
    Texts put to the vote on Tuesday Friday, 7 February 2025, 12:00
    Texts put to the vote on Wednesday Monday, 10 February 2025, 19:00
    Texts put to the vote on Thursday Tuesday, 11 February 2025, 19:00
    Motions for resolutions concerning debates on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law (Rule 150) Wednesday, 12 February 2025, 19:00

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Canadian Businessman Sentenced for Obstruction of Justice for Hiding and Laundering Millions After His 2020 Money Laundering Conviction

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

               WASHINGTON – Firoz Patel, 50, of Montreal, Canada, was sentenced to 41 months in federal prison today in connection with his efforts to conceal and launder 450 Bitcoin, currently valued at over $43 million, that he hid from the U.S. District Court handling his 2020 conviction and sentencing for conspiring to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business and to commit money laundering. 

               The sentence was announced by U.S. Attorney Edward R. Martin, Jr., HSI Acting Special Agent in Charge Kai Wah Chan of Homeland Security Investigation’s Washington, D.C., Field Office.

               Patel plead guilty on September 17, 2024, to one count of obstruction of an official proceeding. In addition to the prison term, U.S. District Court Judge Dabney L. Friedrich ordered  three years of supervised release, a forfeiture money judgment in the amount of $24,020,699.83, and forfeiture of 450 Bitcoin plus interest currently restrained at a virtual currency exchange in the United Kingdom. 

               In 2020, Patel was convicted and sentenced to 36 months for operating Payza, an illegal financial payments platform that processed cryptocurrency payments.

               According to court documents, in 2004 Patel began operating his payment processing company AlertPay, which evolved into Payza. The Montreal company offered its services to customers across the United States, even though the business lacked a license to operate in any state or the District of Columbia. 

                Throughout Payza’s existence, the company partnered with various money services businesses, such as OboPay in 2012, another online money services business. At Patel’s direction, merchants were not removed from Payza’s platform for being involved in high-risk activities such as Ponzi schemes, money laundering activities, multilevel-marketing (MLM) scams, money-cycler scams, pyramid schemes, and steroid distributors. Payza did not have a Bank Secrecy Act Officer, it did not conduct legally required Bank Secrecy Act/anti-money-laundering audits, and it operated in the United States at various times without registering with the U.S. Department of Treasury Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) or state authorities.

               On July 16, 2020, Patel pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business and to launder monetary instruments, based on his operation of Payza. As a condition of his plea, he was required to identify and forfeit any property involved in the offense to which he pleaded guilty. Although Patel had control over more than 450 Bitcoin in Payza’s illicit proceeds—valued at approximately $24,000,000 at the time—he provided false information to the U.S. Probation Office and the Court in an attempt to hide his illicit Bitcoin wealth, including by claiming his only assets were $30,000 in a retirement savings account. 

                 On November 10, 2020, then-District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson sentenced the defendant to 36 months in prison and two years of supervised release and entered an agreed-upon order requiring Patel to forfeit any property involved in his offense, as well as any property traceable to such property.  Rather than comply, shortly after his sentencing but before reporting to prison, Patel began consolidating Payza’s illicit cryptocurrency proceeds and attempted to deposit them with Binance, a virtual currency exchange. On April 22, 2021, Binance informed Patel that his account was being closed for violating Binance’s terms of service and being flagged by a third-party compliance tool. Forced to withdraw 450 Bitcoin, Patel opened an offshore virtual currency account in his father’s name, listed an address in Belize linked to Payza’s operations, and transferred the same 450 Bitcoin in illicit proceeds into the account shortly before he reported to the Bureau of Prisons. This second virtual currency exchange also deemed the deposit suspicious and froze the funds. 

                Patel contacted the exchange in June 2021 stating “[i]f this is about me, then realize that I am not beholden to any actions by the USA or any other government authorities. I have paid my dues and I owe nothing to anybody.” Patel tasked a Payza business associate to work on providing false Know Your Customer (KYC) information to the virtual currency exchange in an effort to unfreeze the illicit funds. Had the scheme succeeded, Patel would have successfully hid and laundered the funds and been released from prison with 450 BTC in criminal proceeds awaiting him.  The Department of Justice restrained Patel’s Bitcoin through a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty request to the United Kingdom during the course of the investigation.

                 According to the Government’s sentencing memo, Patel became aware of the investigation while serving his 36-month sentence for the 2020 conviction. As Patel neared his release date, he enlisted the assistance of C.A. to impersonate an attorney and engage in sham negotiations with the U.S. Attorney’s Office. C.A. and Patel planned to string along the assigned Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) long enough for Patel to be released on his 2020 conviction and flee the United States to Canada to avoid prosecution. The AUSA and investigators discovered the false impersonation in advance of Patel’s release date and returned an Indictment of Patel in May 2023. He has been in Bureau of Prisons custody or detained pre-trial since June 2021. 

               This case was investigated by the Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Washington, D.C. Field Office. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Kevin L. Rosenberg and Special Assistant United States Attorney Christopher B. Brown of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, and Trial Attorney Jonas Lerman of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team. Valuable assistance was also provided by Scott Meisler and Josh Handell of the Criminal Division’s Appellate Section, and by Trial Attorney Erin Mikita and former Trial Attorney Roberto Iraola of the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs. The case was originally investigated by former Assistant United States Attorney Arvind K. Lal.

    23cr166

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI: Glen Burnie Bancorp Announces Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2024 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    GLEN BURNIE, Md., Feb. 06, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Glen Burnie Bancorp (“Bancorp”) (NASDAQ: GLBZ), the bank holding company for The Bank of Glen Burnie (“Bank”), announced today net loss of $39,000, or -$0.01 per basic and diluted common share, for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, compared to net income of $167,000, or $0.06 per basic and diluted common share, for the three-month period ended December 31, 2023. Bancorp reported a net loss of $112,000, or -$0.04 per basic and diluted common share, for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, compared to net income of $1.4 million, or $0.50 per basic and diluted common share, for the same period in 2023. On December 31, 2024, Bancorp had total assets of $358.9 million. Bancorp is the oldest independent commercial bank in Anne Arundel County.

    “Our financial performance in 2024 is disappointing and represents the challenges inherent in navigating the interest rate environment of the last several years. The Company’s focus on generating additional interest-earning assets at higher current market interest rates and rebuilding our base of core, low-cost deposits was moderately successful,” said Mark C. Hanna, President, and Chief Executive Officer. “Despite the challenges of declining net interest income, the Company’s financial strength is reflected in a strong capital position, available liquidity, and prudent expense management. Although interest expense increased significantly in year over year comparisons, loan growth of $28.9 million and higher yields on earning assets contributed to expanded interest income that partially offset higher interest expense and helped mitigate margin compression.”

    In closing, Mr. Hanna added, “To invest in strategic opportunities that will benefit the long-term performance of the Bank, the difficult decision was made to change the longstanding practice of approving quarterly cash dividends for shareholders. As the Bank evaluates our next 75 years, we are committed to our business model and the economic strength of the communities we serve. To better serve the evolving needs of our clients, there is a need to reinvest in our people, technology, products, and facilities. Based on our capital levels, conservative underwriting policies, on- and off-balance sheet liquidity, strong loan diversification, and current economic conditions within the markets we serve, management expects to navigate the uncertainties and remain well-capitalized. Our focus remains continued execution on our strategic priorities to generate organic loan and deposit growth.”

    Highlights for the Quarter and Year ended December 31, 2024

    Despite growth in loans and deposits for the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2024, net interest income decreased $1.2 million, or 9.84% to $10.9 million through December 31, 2024, as compared to $12.1 million during the same period of 2023. The decrease resulted primarily from a $3.1 million increase in interest expenses, offset by a $1.9 million increase in interest and fees on loans. The $2.0 million increase in interest on deposits was driven by the higher cost of money market deposit balances. The $1.0 million increase in interest on borrowings was driven by a $20.1 million increase in the average balance of borrowed funds due to the elevated level of deposit runoff that occurred in 2023.

    Total interest income increased $1.9 million to $15.2 million for the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2024, compared to the same period in 2023 as the result of a $1.9 million increase in interest and fees on loans. The increase in interest income was driven by rate adjustments on loans offerings consistent with the higher interest rate environment. However, loan pricing pressure/competition will continue to place pressure on the Company’s net interest margin.

    The Company expects that its strong liquidity and capital positions, along with the Bank’s total regulatory capital to risk weighted assets of 16.40% on December 31, 2024, compared to 18.40% for the same period of 2023, will provide ample capacity for future growth.

    Return on average assets for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, was -0.04%, compared to 0.19% for the three-month period ended December 31, 2023. Return on average equity for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, was -0.75%, compared to 4.65% for the three-month period ended December 31, 2023. Lower net income and higher average balances drove the lower return on average assets and the lower return on average equity.

    The cost of funds was 1.38% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, compared to 0.64% for the quarter ended December 31, 2023. The 0.74% increase was primarily driven by the increase in the cost of money market deposits and borrowed funds.

    The book value per share of Bancorp’s common stock was $6.14 on December 31, 2024, compared to $6.70 per share on December 31, 2023. The decrease was primarily due to the increase in unrealized losses on available for sale securities caused by higher market interest rates.

    On December 31, 2024, the Bank remained above all “well-capitalized” regulatory requirement levels. The Bank’s tier 1 risk-based capital ratio was approximately 15.15% on December 31, 2024, compared to 17.37% on December 31, 2023. Liquidity remained strong due to managed cash and cash equivalents, borrowing lines with the FHLB of Atlanta, the Federal Reserve and correspondent banks, and the size and composition of the bond portfolio.

    Balance Sheet Review

    Total assets were $358.9 million on December 31, 2024, an increase of $7.1 million or 2.03%, from $351.8 million on December 31, 2023. Investment securities decreased by $31.5 million or 22.58%, to $107.9 million as of December 31, 2024, compared to $139.4 million for the same period of 2023. Loans, net of deferred fees and costs, were $205.2 million on December 31, 2024, an increase of $28.9 million or 16.40%, from $176.3 million on December 31, 2023. Cash and cash equivalents increased $9.2 million or 60.51%, from $15.2 million on December 31, 2023, to $24.4 million on December 31, 2024.

    Total deposits were $309.2 million on December 31, 2024, an increase of $9.1 million or 3.04%, from $300.1 million on December 31, 2023. Noninterest-bearing deposits were $100.7 million on December 31, 2024, a decrease of $16.2 million or 13.83%, from $116.9 million on December 31, 2023. Interest-bearing deposits were $208.4 million on December 31, 2024, an increase of $25.3 million or 13.81%, from $183.1 million on December 31, 2023. Total borrowings were $30.0 million on December 31, 2024, unchanged from December 31, 2023.

    As of December 31, 2024, total stockholders’ equity was $17.8 million (4.96% of total assets), equivalent to a book value of $6.14 per common share. Total stockholders’ equity on December 31, 2023, was $19.3 million (5.49% of total assets), equivalent to a book value of $6.70 per common share. The decrease in the ratio of stockholders’ equity to total assets was primarily due to the $1.5 million decline in net earnings for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared to the prior year, the $0.6 million after-tax increase in market value loss on the Company’s available-for-sale securities portfolio and a $7.1 million increase in total assets. The increase in unrealized losses primarily resulted from increasing market interest rates year-over-year, which decreased the fair value of the investment securities.

    Asset quality, which has trended within a narrow range over the past several years, remained sound on December 31, 2024. Nonperforming assets, which consist of nonaccrual loans, loans to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty, accruing loans past due 90 days or more, and other real estate owned (“OREO”), represented 0.10% of total assets on December 31, 2024, compared to 0.15% on December 31, 2023. The $7.1 million increase in total assets from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2024, and the $167,000 decrease in nonperforming assets drove the 0.05% decline. The allowance for credit losses on loans was $2.8 million, or 1.38% of total loans, as of December 31, 2024, compared to $2.2 million, or 1.22% of total loans, as of December 31, 2023. The allowance for credit losses for unfunded commitments was $584,000 as of December 31, 2024, compared to $473,000 as of December 31, 2023.

    Review of Financial Results

    For the three-month periods ended December 31, 2024, and 2023

    Net loss for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, was $39,000, compared to net income of $167,000 for the three-month period ended December 31, 2023.

    Net interest income for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, totaled $2.8 million, a decrease of $128,000 from the three-month period ended December 31, 2023. Despite a $520,000 increase in interest income, the decrease in net interest income was primarily due to a $648,000 increase in interest expenses predominantly related to the advantage money market deposit product.

    Net interest margin for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, was 2.98%, compared to 3.17% for the same period of 2023. Higher average yields and balances on interest-earning assets combined with higher average interest-bearing funds, lower average noninterest-bearing funds, and higher cost of funds were the primary drivers of year-over-year results.

    The average balance of interest-earning assets increased $7.1 million while the yield increased 0.50% from 3.77% to 4.27%, when comparing the three-month periods ending December 31, 2023, and 2024, respectively. The average balance of interest-bearing funds increased $28.9 million, the average balance of noninterest-bearing funds decreased $21.3 million, and the cost of funds increased 0.74%, when comparing the three-month periods ending December 31, 2023, and 2024, respectively.

    The average balance of interest-bearing deposits in banks and investment securities decreased $22.1 million from $185.9 million to $163.8 million for the fourth quarter of 2024, compared to the same period of 2023 while the yield increased 0.01% from 2.68% to 2.69% during that same period.

    Average loan balances increased $29.2 million to $204.7 million for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, compared to $175.5 million for the same period of 2023, while the yield increased from 4.96% to 5.54% during that same period. The increase in loan yields for the fourth quarter of 2024 reflected continued runoff of the low-yielding indirect automobile loan portfolio and new loan originations at higher yields.

    The provision of allowance for credit loss on loans for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, was $71,000, compared to $103,000 for the same period of 2023.

    Noninterest income for the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, was $332,000, compared to $299,000 for the three-month period ended December 31, 2023, an increase of $33,000 or 11.04%. The increase was primarily driven by a $31,000 casualty gain due to insurance proceeds exceeding the book value of assets destroyed by water damage.

    For the three-month period ended December 31, 2024, noninterest expense was $3.1 million, compared to $2.9 million for the three-month period ended December 31, 2023, an increase of $171,000 or 5.82%. The primary contributors to the $171,000 increase, when compared to the three-month period ended December 31, 2023, were increases in salary and employee benefits, legal, accounting, and other professional fees, data processing and item processing services and other expenses.

    For the twelve-month periods ended December 31, 2024, and 2023

    Net loss for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, was $112,000, compared to net income of $1.4 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2023.

    Net interest income for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, totaled $10.9 million, a decrease of $1.2 million from $12.1 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2023. The decrease in net interest income was primarily due to a $3.1 million increase in interest expenses related to growth of the advantage money market deposit product balances and short-term borrowings necessitated by the deposit runoff during 2023, offset by $1.9 million higher interest and fees on loans.

    Net interest margin for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, was 2.98%, compared to 3.31% for the same period of 2023. Higher average yields and lower average balances of interest-earning assets combined with higher average interest-bearing funds, lower average noninterest-bearing funds, and higher cost of funds were the primary drivers of year-over-year results.

    The average balance of interest-earning assets decreased $252,000, while the yield increased 0.52% from 3.63% to 4.15%, when comparing the twelve-month periods ending December 31, 2023, and 2024, respectively. The average balance of interest-bearing funds increased $20.2 million, the average balance of noninterest-bearing funds decreased $20.3 million, and the cost of funds increased 0.90%, when comparing the twelve-month periods ending December 31, 2023, and 2024, respectively.

    The average balance of interest-bearing deposits in banks and investment securities decreased $13.1 million from $187.4 million to $174.3 million for the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2024, compared to the same period of 2023. The yield increased 0.16% from 2.55% to 2.71% during that same period. The increase in yields for the twelve-month period can be attributed to the change in the mix of cash balances held in interest-bearing deposits in banks and investment securities available for sale and increases in the overnight federal funds rate between the years.

    Average loan balances increased $12.8 million to $192.6 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, compared to $179.8 million for the same period of 2023. The yield increased 0.69% from 4.76% to 5.45% during that same period. The increase in loan yields for the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2024, reflected continued runoff of the low-yielding indirect automobile loan portfolio and new loan originations at higher yields.

    The Company recorded a provision of allowance for credit loss on loans of $844,000 for the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2024, compared to $96,000 for the same period in 2023. The $748,000 increase in the provision in 2024 compared to 2023, primarily reflects a $61,000 increase in net charge offs, a $28.2 million increase in the reservable balance of the loan portfolio and a 0.16% increase in the current expected credit loss percentage. As a result, the allowance for credit loss on loans was $2.8 million on December 31, 2024, representing 1.38% of total loans, compared to $2.2 million, or 1.22% of total loans on December 31, 2023.

    Noninterest income for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, was $1.2 million, compared to $1.1 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2023, an increase of $57,000 or 5.20%. The increase was driven primarily by a $52,000 increase in other fees and commissions which included a $31,000 casualty gain due to insurance proceeds exceeding the book value of assets destroyed by water damage.

    For the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2024, noninterest expense was $11.9 million, compared to $11.6 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2023. The primary contributors to the $253,000 increase when compared to the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2023, were increases in legal, accounting, and other professional fees, occupancy and equipment expenses, and other expenses which included the allowance for unfunded commitments, partially offset by decreases in salary and employee benefits costs.

    Glen Burnie Bancorp Information

    Glen Burnie Bancorp is a bank holding company headquartered in Glen Burnie, Maryland. Founded in 1949, The Bank of Glen Burnie® is a locally owned community bank with seven branch offices serving Anne Arundel County. The Bank is engaged in the commercial and retail banking business including the acceptance of demand and time deposits, and the origination of loans to individuals, associations, partnerships, and corporations. The Bank’s real estate financing consists of residential first and second mortgage loans, home equity lines of credit and commercial mortgage loans. The Bank also originates automobile loans through arrangements with local automobile dealers. Additional information is available at www.thebankofglenburnie.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    The statements contained herein that are not historical financial information may be deemed to constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, which could cause the company’s actual results in the future to differ materially from its historical results and those presently anticipated or projected. These statements are evidenced by terms such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “should,” “expect,” “believe,” “intend,” and similar expressions. Although these statements reflect management’s good faith beliefs and projections, they are not guarantees of future performance and they may not prove true. For a more complete discussion of these and other risk factors, please see the company’s reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

             
    GLEN BURNIE BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (dollars in thousands)
               
               
      December 31,   September 30,   December 31,
      2024   2024   2023
      (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (audited)
    ASSETS          
    Cash and due from banks $ 2,012     $ 2,255     $ 1,940  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions   22,452       20,207       13,301  
    Total Cash and Cash Equivalents   24,464       22,462       15,241  
               
    Investment securities available for sale, at fair value   107,949       119,958       139,427  
    Restricted equity securities, at cost   1,671       246       1,217  
               
    Loans, net of deferred fees and costs   205,219       206,975       176,307  
    Less: Allowance for credit losses   (2,839 )     (2,748 )     (2,157 )
    Loans, net   202,380       204,227       174,150  
               
    Premises and equipment, net   2,630       2,723       3,046  
    Bank owned life insurance   8,834       8,789       8,657  
    Deferred tax assets, net   8,548       6,879       7,897  
    Accrued interest receivable   1,345       1,478       1,192  
    Accrued taxes receivable   148       497       121  
    Prepaid expenses   471       486       475  
    Other assets   516       614       390  
    Total Assets $ 358,956     $ 368,359     $ 351,813  
               
    LIABILITIES          
    Noninterest-bearing deposits $ 100,747     $ 115,938     $ 116,922  
    Interest-bearing deposits   208,442       198,335       183,145  
    Total Deposits   309,189       314,273       300,067  
               
    Short-term borrowings   30,000       30,000       30,000  
    Defined pension liability   330       329       324  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   1,620       2,597       2,097  
    Total Liabilities   341,139       347,199       332,488  
               
    STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY          
    Common stock, par value $1, authorized 15,000,000 shares, issued and outstanding 2,900,681; 2,900,681; 2,882,627; shares as of December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and December 31, 2023 respectively.   2,901       2,901       2,883  
    Additional paid-in capital   11,037       11,037       10,964  
    Retained earnings   22,882       22,921       23,859  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (19,003 )     (15,699 )     (18,381 )
    Total Stockholders’ Equity   17,817       21,160       19,325  
    Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity $ 358,956     $ 368,359     $ 351,813  
               
    GLEN BURNIE BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
    (dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
    (unaudited)
                     
         Three Months Ended
    December 31,    		   Twelve Months Ended
    December 31,
          2024       2023       2024       2023  
    Interest income                                
    Interest and fees on loans   $ 2,851     $ 2,192     $ 10,498     $ 8,559  
    Interest and dividends on securities     773       1,082       3,379       4,147  
    Interest on deposits with banks and federal funds sold     332       162       1,335       631  
    Total Interest Income     3,956       3,436       15,212       13,337  
                                     
    Interest expense                                
    Interest on deposits     818       176       2,533       513  
    Interest on short-term borrowings     375       369       1,738       689  
    Total Interest Expense     1,193       545       4,271       1,202  
                                     
    Net Interest Income     2,763       2,891       10,941       12,135  
    Provision of credit loss allowance     71       103       844       96  
    Net interest income after release of credit loss provision     2,692       2,788       10,097       12,039  
                                     
    Noninterest income                                
    Service charges on deposit accounts     42       39       150       159  
    Other fees and commissions     245       217       829       777  
    Income on life insurance     45       43       178       164  
    Total Noninterest Income     332       299       1,157       1,100  
                                     
    Noninterest expenses                                
    Salary and employee benefits     1,708       1,621       6,580       6,710  
    Occupancy and equipment expenses     330       339       1,325       1,294  
    Legal, accounting and other professional fees     346       301       1,115       993  
    Data processing and item processing services     260       250       1,016       1,005  
    FDIC insurance costs     42       40       161       163  
    Advertising and marketing related expenses     29       25       117       97  
    Loan collection costs     13       8       25       22  
    Telephone costs     44       39       154       151  
    Other expenses     346       324       1,398       1,203  
    Total Noninterest Expenses     3,118       2,947       11,891       11,638  
                                     
    (Loss) income before income taxes     (94 )     140       (637 )     1,501  
    Income tax (benefit) expense     (55 )     (27 )     (525 )     72  
                                     
    Net income (loss)   $ (39 )   $ 167     $ (112 )   $ 1,429  
                                     
    Basic and diluted net income (loss) per common share   $ (0.01 )   $ 0.06     $ (0.04 )   $ 0.50  
                                     
    GLEN BURNIE BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
    For the twelve months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023
    (dollars in thousands)
    (unaudited)
                       
                  Accumulated    
          Additional       Other   Total
      Common   Paid-in   Retained   Comprehensive   Stockholders’
      Stock   Capital   Earnings   (Loss) Income   Equity
    Balance, December 31, 2022 $ 2,865     $ 10,862     $ 23,579     $ (21,252 )   $ 16,054  
                                           
    Net income   –       –       1,429       –       1,429  
    Cash dividends, $0.40 per share   –       –       (1,149 )     –       (1,149 )
    Dividends reinvested under dividend reinvestment plan   18       102       –       –       120  
    Other comprehensive income   –       –       –       2,871       2,871  
    Balance, December 31, 2023 $ 2,883     $ 10,964     $ 23,859     $ (18,381 )   $ 19,325  
                                           
                                           
                              Accumulated
    		        
              Additional
    		           Other
    		   Total
      Common
    		  Paid-in
    		   Retained
    		   Comprehensive
    		   Stockholders’
      Stock
    		   Capital
    		   Earnings
    		   Loss
    		   Equity
    Balance, December 31, 2023 $ 2,883     $ 10,964     $ 23,859     $ (18,381 )   $ 19,325  
                                           
    Net loss   –       –       (112 )     –       (112 )
    Cash dividends, $0.30 per share   –       –       (865 )     –       (865 )
    Dividends reinvested under dividend reinvestment plan   18       73       –       –       91  
    Other comprehensive loss   –       –       –       (622 )     (622 )
    Balance, December 31, 2024 $ 2,901     $ 11,037     $ 22,882     $ (19,003 )   $ 17,817  
                                           
    THE BANK OF GLEN BURNIE
    CAPITAL RATIOS
    (dollars in thousands)
    (unaudited)
                     
                  To Be Well
                  Capitalized Under
            To Be Considered   Prompt Corrective
            Adequately Capitalized Action Provisions
      Amount Ratio   Amount Ratio   Amount Ratio
    As of December 31, 2024:                
    Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 36,481 15.15 %   $ 10,837 4.50 %   $ 15,653 6.50 %
    Total Risk-Based Capital $ 39,496 16.40 %   $ 19,265 8.00 %   $ 24,082 10.00 %
    Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital $ 36,481 15.15 %   $ 14,449 6.00 %   $ 19,265 8.00 %
    Tier 1 Leverage $ 36,481 9.97 %   $ 14,640 4.00 %   $ 18,300 5.00 %
                     
    As of September 30, 2024:                
    Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 36,755 15.47 %   $ 10,691 4.50 %   $ 15,443 6.50 %
    Total Risk-Based Capital $ 39,729 16.72 %   $ 19,006 8.00 %   $ 23,758 10.00 %
    Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital $ 36,755 15.47 %   $ 14,255 6.00 %   $ 19,006 8.00 %
    Tier 1 Leverage $ 36,755 10.11 %   $ 14,539 4.00 %   $ 18,173 5.00 %
                     
    As of December 31, 2023:                
    Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 37,975 17.37 %   $ 9,840 4.50 %   $ 14,213 6.50 %
    Total Risk-Based Capital $ 40,237 18.40 %   $ 17,493 8.00 %   $ 21,867 10.00 %
    Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital $ 37,975 17.37 %   $ 13,120 6.00 %   $ 17,493 8.00 %
    Tier 1 Leverage $ 37,975 10.76 %   $ 14,113 4.00 %   $ 17,641 5.00 %
                     
    GLEN BURNIE BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARY
    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
    (dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
                         
                         
        Three Months Ended   Twelve Months Ended
        December 31 September 30 December 31 December 31   December 31
        2024   2024   2023   2024   2023
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (audited)
                         
    Financial Data                    
    Assets   $ 358,956     $ 368,359     $ 351,813     $ 358,956     $ 351,813  
    Investment securities     107,949       119,958       139,427       107,949       139,427  
    Loans, (net of deferred fees & costs)   205,219       206,975       176,307       205,219       176,307  
    Allowance for loan losses     2,839       2,748       2,157       2,839       2,157  
    Deposits     309,189       314,273       300,067       309,189       300,067  
    Borrowings     30,000       30,000       30,000       30,000       30,000  
    Stockholders’ equity     17,817       21,160       19,325       17,817       19,325  
    Net income     (39 )     129       167       (112 )     1,429  
                         
    Average Balances                    
    Assets   $ 366,888     $ 364,127     $ 353,085     $ 363,994     $ 361,731  
    Investment securities     136,868       142,972       174,581       148,037       173,902  
    Loans, (net of deferred fees & costs)   204,703       203,316       175,456       192,646       179,790  
    Deposits     314,046       312,019       310,168       309,838       330,095  
    Borrowings     30,323       30,001       26,579       32,720       12,580  
    Stockholders’ equity     20,664       19,559       14,253       19,169       17,105  
                         
    Performance Ratios                    
    Annualized return on average assets   -0.04 %     0.14 %     0.19 %     -0.03 %     0.40 %
    Annualized return on average equity   -0.75 %     2.63 %     4.65 %     -0.58 %     8.35 %
    Net interest margin     2.98 %     3.06 %     3.17 %     2.98 %     3.31 %
    Dividend payout ratio     0 %     224 %     172 %     -773 %     80 %
    Book value per share   $ 6.14     $ 7.29     $ 6.70     $ 6.14     $ 6.70  
    Basic and diluted net income per share     (0.01 )     0.04       0.06       (0.04 )     0.50  
    Cash dividends declared per share     0.00       0.10       0.10       0.30       0.40  
    Basic and diluted weighted average shares outstanding     2,900,681       2,897,929       2,880,398       2,893,871       2,873,500  
                         
    Asset Quality Ratios                    
    Allowance for loan losses to loans     1.38 %     1.33 %     1.22 %     1.38 %     1.22 %
    Nonperforming loans to avg. loans     0.18 %     0.14 %     0.30 %     0.19 %     0.29 %
    Allowance for loan losses to nonaccrual & 90+ past due loans     789.1 %     937.5 %     409.3 %     789.1 %     409.3 %
    Net charge-offs annualize to avg. loans     -0.04 %     -0.09 %     0.08 %     0.08 %     0.06 %
                         
    Capital Ratios                    
    Common Equity Tier 1 Capital     15.15 %     15.47 %     17.37 %     15.15 %     17.37 %
    Tier 1 Risk-based Capital Ratio     15.15 %     15.47 %     17.37 %     15.15 %     17.37 %
    Leverage Ratio     9.97 %     10.11 %     10.76 %     9.97 %     10.76 %
    Total Risk-Based Capital Ratio     16.40 %     16.72 %     18.40 %     16.40 %     18.40 %

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Development Asia: Strengthening Digital Safety Systems for Children in Nepal

    Source: Asia Development Bank

    This participative research was initiated under the Safety for Children and their Rights OnLine (SCROL) project in Nepal led by Terre des Hommes Netherlands in partnership with the Center for Legal Research and Resource Development (CeLRRD), Child Workers in Nepal (CWIN), and Women Youth in Social Service Human Rights (WYESHR).

    The research was conducted in the Gandaki and Bagmati provinces in 2024 by 162 children through voluntary participation and a simple random sampling method. A total of 443 children and 213 parents responded to a questionnaire designed by children.

    The following findings, based on children’s insights, highlight critical trends in online experiences that have the potential to shape effective solutions.

    Social media usage patterns: According to the survey results, Facebook emerged as the dominant social media platform, with 42% of respondents indicating it as their primary choice for online engagement. YouTube is the second most popular platform, capturing 26% of user preferences, while Instagram maintains a significant presence, with 14% of users favoring it as their main social platform.

    Response to online negativity: The data reveals essential insights into youth coping mechanisms when encountering harmful online content. A plurality of young users (31.6%) prioritize peer support by confiding in friends, while a slightly smaller proportion (27.5%) choose to discuss these issues with their parents. Notably, a concerning 20% of respondents internalize these experiences by keeping them private. This isolation can increase the risk of revictimization and lead to mental health issues among children, highlighting potential areas for intervention.

    Digital safety practices: Most users (78.6%) demonstrate awareness of basic online safety measures by consistently declining friendship requests from unknown individuals on Facebook, indicating a strong foundation of protective behaviors.

    Social media perception: The survey reveals a notable division in attitudes toward social media engagement. Nearly half (49.2%) of respondents express caution by discouraging peers from joining social platforms, while 40.2% maintain a positive outlook and actively encourage participation.

    Mental health impact: The research identifies that approximately one in six respondents (17%) acknowledge experiencing psychological distress related to their online activities, highlighting the importance of mental health support in digital spaces.

    Digital account security: Most users (90.7%) demonstrate strong ethical digital practices by maintaining strict account security, specifically avoiding trading or sharing their online and gaming accounts.

    Parental oversight acceptance: The data shows that slightly more than half of young users (53%) have a positive attitude toward parental monitoring and established online boundaries, suggesting a balanced approach to digital supervision.

    “Monitoring and setting boundaries are good—they protect us from OCSE. However, they [parents] shouldn’t interfere with our studies, privacy, or personal life.” – Rima (name changed)

    Parental control approaches: Regarding social media access, most parents (61%) opt for an open approach with unrestricted usage, while approximately one-quarter (26.5%) implement complete restrictions, revealing diverse parenting strategies in digital supervision.

    Parent-child digital dynamics: The survey indicates that approximately half of the children (50.7%) feel comfortable using their devices in their parents’ presence, suggesting a relatively balanced level of trust and openness in digital behavior.

    Child protection awareness: A significant finding reveals that more than half of parents (55%) lack knowledge about available reporting mechanisms for Online Child Sexual Exploitation (OCSE), indicating a crucial gap in child safety awareness.

    Parental acceptance of children’s display of alternative gender and sexual identity online: Parental acceptance of their children’s alternative gender and sexual identity, such as LGBTQ+, discovered through social media use varies across Nepal’s regions. The Bagmati region shows higher acceptance (53.91%) than Gandaki (24.10%), with combined acceptance at 42.18%. Resistance is higher in Gandaki (45.78%) than in Bagmati (29.69%), showing more progressive thinking in Bagmati. The remaining parents are uncertain (21.33%) or would seek specialist help (0.47%).

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Kennedy, Cramer reintroduce bill to prevent banks from discriminating against law-abiding businesses

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator John Kennedy (Louisiana)

    WASHINGTON – Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, joined Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) in reintroducing the Fair Access to Banking Act to prevent banks from denying services to law-abiding businesses for political purposes.  

    “Banks shouldn’t stop customers from accessing accounts or services based on political affiliation or industry. I’m proud to help introduce the Fair Access to Banking Act to make sure financial institutions aren’t working as political activists against law-abiding Americans,” said Kennedy.

    “When progressives failed at banning these entire industries, what they did instead is they turned to weaponizing banks as sort of a backdoor to carry out their activist goals. Financial institutions are backed by taxpayers, for crying out loud! They should be obligated to provide services in an unbiased, risk-based manner. The Fair Access to Banking Act ensures that banks provide fair access to services and enacts strict penalties for categorically discriminating against legal industries and individuals,” said Cramer.

    In 2021, the Trump administration finalized its Fair Access Rule to require banks to make individual risk assessments and stop broad discrimination against customers. However, the Biden administration paused the rule’s implementation. 

    The Fair Access to Banking Act would penalize banks and credit unions with more than $10 billion in assets for refusing services to law-abiding companies or people. The bill also requires banks to give a written explanation for denying services to a customer.

    Background:

    • The Fair Access to Banking Act would protect Americans in the wake of major banks’ move to discriminate against legal businesses. Some of the largest U.S. banks have blocked businesses and consumers from accessing financial services based on political ideology.
    • In 2020, five of the country’s largest banks announced they will not provide loans or credit to support oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge even though Congress explicitly authorized it.
    • In 2021, JPMorgan Chase declared it would refuse financial services to coal producers. Bank of America also began a politically motivated effort to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions from its financing activities by 2050, an effort directly targeting producers of reliable American energy. Earlier this year, however, Bank of America quietly withdrew from a climate alliance seeking net-zero emissions.
    • Payment services like Apple Pay and PayPal have denied their services for transactions involving firearms or ammunition.

    Sens. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Katie Britt (R-Ala.), Ted Budd (R-N.C.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), John Curtis (R-Utah), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Jim Justice (R-W.Va.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Dave McCormick (R-Pa.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) also cosponsored the bill. 

    The full bill text is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Trio Sentenced to More Than 16 Years in Federal Prison for Mail Theft and Card Cracking Scheme

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    INDIANAPOLIS— Three individuals have been sentenced to a combined 16 years in federal prison for their roles in a multi-year mail theft and bank fraud scheme.

    According to court documents, between October 2021 and April 2022, Cortez Venable, Ephraim Aung, and Brooke Bryan conspired together to commit bank fraud using financial documents such as checks and money orders, which were stolen from U.S. Postal Service (USPS) collection boxes. These collection boxes can only be opened by special “arrow keys” that belong to USPS letter carriers. In order to obtain the arrow keys, Venable and other unknown individuals robbed postal workers at gunpoint while they were on their daily routes delivering mail. Venable robbed a letter carrier on October 4, 2021. Prior to the robbery, Venable and Aung had been in contact via text message. Aung told Venable to take the letter carrier’s mail bag, in addition to their arrow keys, and to look for checks in the stolen mail.

    On December 6, 2021, Bryan and Aung served as lookouts while other unknown men attempted to rob a letter carrier of her arrow key in the parking lot of an apartment complex. The letter carrier ran to Bryan and Aung’s vehicle for help, unaware that they were involved in the scheme.

    Aung again served as a lookout during an armed robbery of a letter carrier that occurred on December 21, 2021.

    Using the arrow keys taken during the robberies, Venable and Aung stole mail, checks and money orders from USPS blue collection boxes in the Indianapolis area. Next, they used the stolen checks and money orders to obtain real cash by either (1) creating fraudulent checks and money orders using some or all of the information found on the stolen checks and money orders; or (2) altering the payee information on the stolen checks and money orders. Venable and Aung recruited others to deposit the fraudulent checks and money orders into their personal bank accounts, a scheme that has come to be known as “card cracking.” Bryan also deposited stolen financial instruments into her personal account.

    Card cracking is a form of fraud where bank account holders respond to an online solicitation for “easy money” and provide a debit card for withdrawal of fake check deposits. Criminals use social media platforms like Facebook, X, Instagram, or Telegram to solicit account holders. Those who respond to these solicitations – now accomplices – provide their debit card, PIN, password, and other personal identifying information to give the criminal direct access to their account, as well as payment of sometimes $15,000 for the service. The fraudster deposits the worthless checks and either immediately withdraws the funds at an ATM or transfers it out of the account via money transfer applications like Zelle or CashApp. The criminal sometimes provides the customer with a cut of the money withdrawn using worthless checks – or, in other cases, takes all funds out of the customer’s account.

    During a search of Venable’s car and home, U.S. Postal Service Investigators recovered 247 pieces of stolen mail, three arrow keys, $70,121.44 in stolen checks and four firearms. As a convicted felon, Venable was prohibited from possessing firearms.

    Investigators also searched the apartment that Bryan and Aung shared and located several stolen checks, altered money orders, laptops, a printer, a scanner, and blank check stock, along with other items commonly used to alter checks, including razor blades and white out. Multiple firearms were also recovered in their residence.

    In total, more than 150 people were victimized by this scheme, losing a total of approximately $104,747.09.

    Aung, Bryan and Venable were convicted and sentenced as follows:

    Defendant Charges Sentence
    Ephraim Aung, 23, Indianapolis
    • Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud
    • Bank Fraud, 2 Counts
    • Mail Theft

    5 years imprisonment

    3 years supervised release

    $807 in restitution

    $500 fine
    Brooke Bryan, 22, Indianapolis
    • Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud
    • Bank Fraud

    18 months imprisonment

    2 years supervised release

    $807 in restitution

    $500 fine
    Cortez Venable, 27, Lawrence
    • Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud
    • Bank Fraud
    • Robbery or Mail
    • Brandishing a Firearm In Furtherance of a Crime of Violence
    • Mail Theft
    • Keys or Locks Stolen

    130 months imprisonment

    3 years supervised release

    $807 in restitution

    $500 fine

    “Not only did this scheme victimize and traumatize letter carriers – it also victimized ordinary citizens who rely on the United States mail to send important correspondence or pay bills,” said John E. Childress, Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana. “Letter carriers should not have to live in fear of gun violence simply for doing their jobs. Americans should not have to fear that their important financial documents will be stolen and exploited by fraudsters who wreak financial havoc. The serious federal prison sentences in this case demonstrates that the Department of Justice, working with our federal partners, will ensure there will be serious consequences for violence against public servants and fraud against the public.”

    “This sentencing represents the hard work and dedication by USPS OIG Special Agents, the U.S. Postal Inspectors and the Beech Grove and Lawrence Police Departments, working with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to bring charges on this significant mail theft investigation. Substantial sentences such as these are a staunch reminder of the severity of stealing from the U.S. Mail,” said Special Agent in Charge Dennus Bishop, U.S. Postal Service, Office of Inspector General, Central Area Field Office. “The majority of postal employees are hard-working public servants dedicated to moving mail to its proper destination. The USPS OIG, along with our law enforcement partners, remain committed to safeguarding the U.S. Mail and ensuring the accountability and integrity of U.S. Postal Service employees.”

    “The sentencing of these three individuals shows the utmost importance we place on the safety of U.S. Postal Service employees and the sanctity of the U.S. mail,” said Detroit Division Acting Inspector in Charge Felicia George. “We will not stop pursuing those who seek to harm our employees and victimize postal customers. We will bring them to justice to account for their violent and selfish crimes. The partnerships we’ve established with our USPS OIG counterparts, local police departments, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office allowed us to work jointly to pursue and hold these individuals accountable. Let this serve as reminder to those who want to make a quick dollar by traumatizing our letter carriers and financially preying on the American public: We will find you and bring you to justice.”

    The U.S. Postal Inspection Service investigated this case, with assistance from the U.S. Postal Service – Office of the Inspector General, the Beech Grove Police Department, and the Lawrence Police Department. The sentence was imposed by U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Childress thanked Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kelsey Massa and Meredith Wood and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Lawrence Hilton, who prosecuted this case.

    ###

    MIL Security OSI –